Contact

New developments in the property arena: Attie Pretorius talks to Provocate Magazine

Back to top

New developments in the property arena: Attie Pretorius talks to Provocate Magazine

Chairman and National Practice Head of our Real Estate team, Attie Pretorius discusses changes in the property law arena with PROvocate magazine.

20 Feb 2017 2 min read Real Estate Alert Article

Chairman and National Practice Head of CDH’s Real Estate team, Attie Pretorius was recently featured in SAPOA’s property advocate magazine, PROvocate. In the article, Attie taps into his 37 years of property law experience, explaining how the role of property lawyers has evolved during his career. Attie also provides readers with valuable insights into new developments within South Africa’s property arena, touching on each of the below topics:

  • Restructuring the 99 year long-term lease around Waqf laws.
  • Large listed property funds looking to diversify in Europe, Australia and US.
  • Inner city conversions of old office buildings into residential apartments.
  • Inclusionary housing election promises.
  • Current issues faced by sectional title schemes and the new legislation that seeks to put an end to these issues.
  • Shortage of available land to develop and the introduction of a state and parastatal land registry.

Our Real Estate team is externally praised for its depth of resources, capabilities and experience.

  • Legal 500 EMEA 2014–2016 ranked Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr in Tier 1 for real estate.
  • Property & Construction Team Of The Year 2014 awarded to our Real Estate practice in the African Legal Awards.
  • The Legal 500 EMEA 2015–2016 recommended Attie for real estate.
  • Who’s Who Legal 2012–2014 identified Attie as a leading lawyer in real estate and in 2014 he was listed in The International Who’s Who of Business Lawyers.
  • Attie received a Lifetime Achievement Award for Excellence in Real Estate Law at the inaugural SA Professional Services Awards 2014.

The information and material published on this website is provided for general purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. We make every effort to ensure that the content is updated regularly and to offer the most current and accurate information. Please consult one of our lawyers on any specific legal problem or matter. We accept no responsibility for any loss or damage, whether direct or consequential, which may arise from reliance on the information contained in these pages. Please refer to our full terms and conditions. Copyright © 2024 Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr. All rights reserved. For permission to reproduce an article or publication, please contact us cliffedekkerhofmeyr@cdhlegal.com.

You might also be interested in

11 Mar 2024

by Tayyibah Suliman and Zachary Kokosioulis

CIPC hack: What we know and how to mitigate the risk

The Companies and Intellectual Property Commission of South Africa (CIPC), which falls under the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition and is responsible for maintaining the country’s business and intellectual property registrations, released a statement regarding a data breach which compromised its systems on 29 February2024. 

Technology & Communications

2 min read

31 Oct 2024

by Heinrich Louw

There is no greatness in your lateness: Not sticking to the Tax Court Rules in respect of discovery

Earlier this year, the Tax Court handed down judgment in the matter of CZY (In liquidation) v The Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (Case No.: IT 45997) ( 27 February2024).  The matter related to an application for condonation filed by the taxpayer for the late submission of a Rule 36(6) notice, requesting further and better discovery from the South African Revenue Service (SARS).

Tax & Exchange Control

3 min read

22 May 2024

by Tayyibah Suliman and Lutfiyya Ramiah

Proposed directive on crypto transactions

South Africa’s cryptocurrency landscape may be in for a shift as the Financial Intelligence Centre (FIC) released a proposed directive regarding crypto assettransfers 

Technology & Communications

2 min read

9 Sep 2024

by Phetheni Nkuna, Thato Makoaba and Thobeka Kalipa

Beyond status: Parameters of section 198D of the LRA, and competent relief for current and former employees

Section 198D of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 (LRA) contains general provisions applicable to sections 198A to 198C, and vests the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) or bargaining council with the power to conciliate and arbitrate any dispute related to the interpretation or application of these subsections. This includes disputes related to the status of the employment relationship between a temporary employee and the client of a temporary employment service (TES). Once the CCMA determines that the employee is deemed an employee of the client in terms of section 198A(3)(b), is the scope of section 198D wide enough to empower the CCMA to grant substantive relief? What about those who are no longer “ employed ” at the time of lodging a dispute?

Employment Law

3 min read

11 Sep 2024

by Gift Xaba

Silence is violence: The role of men in advocating for women’s rights and curbing the rise of gender-based discrimination

Gift Xaba, Senior Associate in the Pro Bono & Human Rights practice joined Naledi Moleo on Newzroom Afrika to discuss Silence is violence: The role of men in advocating for women’s rights and curbing the rise of gender-based discrimination.

Pro Bono & Human Rights

09:32 Minutes

18 Apr 2024

by Corné Lewis, Claudia Moser and Denzil Mhlongo

What’s in a name? The status of Tax Courts as courts of law

The South African legal system is host to a number of quasi-judicial decision-making bodies which, while having the power to make decisions which are authoritative and may be binding on parties and while conducting proceedings in a judicial manner, cannot be described as courts of law in the proper sense. The High Court in the case of Poulter v The Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (A88/2023) ZAWCHC had to determine whether the Tax Court was a court of law for the purposes of deciding whether a taxpayer could be represented by a layperson in the Tax Court. It should be noted that the Tax Court first considered the issue of a layperson’s right of appearance before it in 2016 (see our Tax and Exchange Control Alert of 9 September 2016), which we refer tobelow.  

Tax & Exchange Control

8 min read

This website uses cookies to enhance the browsing experience. For more information, please see our Cookie Policy.

Accept Decline