BEE for property practitioners
Naam
Sakeliga v Minister van Menslike Nedersettings
Citation
Sakeliga v Minister of Human Settlements
Begin / Start
Jul 1, 2024
Tipe / Type
Hof
Hooggeregshof: Pretoria
Court
High Court: Pretoria
Litigasiefase
Voorbereiding van hofstukke
Phase
Preparation of court papers
Volgende hofdatum
Opsomming
Die gewysigde Wet op Eiendomspraktisyns verplig alle eiendomspraktisyns om 'n BEE-sertifikaat in te dien as voorvereiste om te mag praktiseer. Praktisyns wat nie aan BEE wil of kan deelneem nie moet kostes aangaan om 'n sertifikaat te bekom wat hul BEE-deelname bevestig. Die nuwe Wet veroorsaak dus BEE-verwante uitgawes selfs vir nie-deelnemers aan BEE, en maak die deur oop vir nog meer omvattende BEE-dwang in die industrie. Sakeliga maak gereed om dele van die Wet op Eiendomspraktisyns wat BEE verplig, onwettig en ongrondwetlik te laat verklaar. Sakeliga is gekant teen BEE, veral waar dit ingespan word as ’n vereistes om enigsins ’n beroep of professie te mag beoefen. Litigasie is in hierdie geval nodig om die skakel tussen BEE en sertifisering vir eiendomspraktisyns te breek.
Sakeliga en andere wat daartoe bygedra het, het reeds 'n oorwinning vanjaar behaal deur die Reguleringsraad vir Eiendomspraktisyns te dwing om 'n beleid om 'n sekere vlak van BEE-nakoming van praktisyns te vereis, af te skaf.
Summary
The amended Property Practitioners Act compels all property practitioners to submit a BEE certificate as prerequisite for practising. Practitioners who do not want to or cannot take part in BEE have to incur costs to obtain a certificate confirming their BEE participation. The new Act therefore is causing BEE-related expenses even for practitioners not taking part in BEE and opens the door for even more comprehensive BEE compulsion in the industry. Sakeliga is developing a case to have parts of the Property Practitioners Act that require BEE, declared unlawful and unconstitutional. Sakeliga is opposed to BEE, the more so where it is used as a requirement for the mere exercise of an occupation or profession. Litigation is necessary in this case to break the link between BEE and certification for property practitioners. Should Sakeliga obtain the necessary support from the industry, litigation will ensue.
Sakeliga and others have already won a victory this year by forcing the Property Practitioners Regulatory Authority to scrap a policy of requiring a certain level of BEE compliance from practitioners.
Teenpartye
Dokumente
Updates