Francois Nortjé, founder of NT55 Investments and developer of Port of Gauteng, has brought an application before the Gauteng High Court challenging the legality of environmental approvals granted by the Gauteng Department of Environmental Affairs to the Gauteng Department of Roads and Transport for the proposed K148 road.
Nortjé and NT55 have also secured an interdict preventing the Department from proceeding with the construction of proposed road K148.
The Gauteng Department of Roads and Transport is appealing the granting of the interdict. This hearing
will take place on 17 February 2026.
In April 2025, Judge Bashier Valley, who presides in the Johannesburg Division of the Gauteng High Court, turned down the application by Nortjé and NT55 to have the Environmental Impact Record of Decision set aside. The appeal against that judgment is on the court roll on 3 and 4 February.
The K148 is planned to run from the TotalEnergies filling station on the N3 southwards to an area north of the Suikerbosrand Nature Reserve. Nortjé’s application seeks an interdict and judicial review of the decision-making process that enabled the project to proceed, citing serious procedural, legal and environmental irregularities.
Significant Environmental and Procedural Omissions
The approved road design enters a sensitive wetland ecosystem that is home to five Red Data bird species, as well as critical watercourses and environmental buffers.
“There are material inconsistencies and omissions in the approvals process,” says Nortjé. “In the base environmental application for the land development, environmental specialists appointed by the developer of that land originally recommended a 200-metre buffer around the wetland due to its ecological importance and sensitivity. This was inexplicably reduced to 30 metres by officials in the Department of Environmental Affairs in the development’s environmental application approval in 2012.”
In 2015, the Gauteng Department of Roads and Transport brought an Environmental Application for the construction of the proposed K148 road into this protected wetland. The original record of the decision was confusing. Condition 3.1 in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Record of Decision stated that the full application was granted, but condition 3.3 refused development on the floodplain. Findings 4(c), (d) and (e) confirmed a 30-metre buffer from the wetland boundary due to its environmental sensitivity. In 2020, after the interdict application by Nortjé, the Gauteng Department of Roads and Transport applied to amend the EIA Record of Decision. They added seven more properties to the application, as these properties had been omitted from the original application.
When the amended Record of Decision was issued in January 2021, condition 3.3 and the three findings around sensitivity and the 30-metre buffer were removed without an application or public participation.
A “Predetermined” Outcome and Technical Anomalies
Further anomalies raised in the Review Application include:
- The Gauteng Transport Infrastructure Act (GTIA) explicitly prohibits EIAs from being granted where preliminary designs have been gazetted. The K148’s preliminary design was gazetted in the early 2000s;
- The removal of findings relating to wetland sensitivity and environmental risk from final reports;
- Failure to scope the sewerage plant over which the road will be built; and,
- Failure to identify that the proposed road will be constructed over the Transnet Petroleum Pipeline from Heidelberg to Alberton, thus not scoping or addressing this in the environmental investigation.
When these issues were raised during the review process, the response from the then MEC for Economic Development, Environment, Agriculture and Rural Development, Parks Tau, in an Answering Affidavit of June 2022 stated: “The intention was, from the outset, to authorise the construction for the whole section of this provincial road, and in relation thereto, for the specific listed activities to commence.”This statement confirms that approval of the full road alignment was predetermined, despite identified environmental sensitivities.
Commitment to Lawful Development
“The environmental impact of this proposed road has been clearly articulated and is significant,” continues Nortjé. “Yet the Department of Environmental Affairs appears to have supported a process that falls short of both environmental law and administrative justice.”
Nortjé points out that the new Member of the Executive Committee (MEC) Ewan Botha, was appointed in 2025 and has a legal duty to enforce the law and protect the environment.
NT55 emphasises that the legal action is not intended to halt development, but rather to ensure that development proceeds lawfully and responsibly.
“Our position is simple: infrastructure must be built within the law. There are statutory steps that remain outstanding and cannot be bypassed,” emphasises Nortjé.
These include:
- Outstanding environmental applications under Listing of National Environmental Management Act are 1(19) and 3(14). The Gauteng Department of Roads and Transport applied for approval of only three environmental listings when four are required. They also applied for Listing 3(19) instead of 1(19). Listing 3(19) applies to a runway, whereas 1(19) applies to a road. Gauteng’s Department of Environment granted 3(19) for a runway. Gauteng Department of Roads and Transport also never applied for Listing 3(14), which is required in sensitive areas;
- Failure to apply for environmental approval for the 15th property and two related water licences. The road is proclaimed over 15 properties, not 14. The 15th property is within 500m of a wetland, thus requiring the 2 extra water licences;
- No water use licences were applied for to construct the road within the sensitive wetland or to relocate the sewerage plant over which the road will be built.
Despite these outstanding legal requirements, the Gauteng Department of Roads and Transport is appealing the interdict that halted construction of the proposed road, with the appeal set down for 17 February.
Ends
