Congregations Keep Their Buildings: A South African Court Rules Against a Church in a Property Split

• Thirteen congregations left the Nederduitsch Hervormde Kerk (NHKA) between 2010 and 2014
• They objected to the wording of the church’s apology for apartheid
• In March 2022 the Pretoria High Court ruled the congregations could transfer their properties
• The court said the NHKA was not a party to the donations and had no standing

A South African court has ruled that congregations which left the Nederduitsch Hervormde Kerk (NHKA) keep the authority to transfer their properties, according to an analysis by Yolanda van der Vyver published by Canopy Forum on May 19, 2023.

Between 2010 and 2014, 13 congregations separated from the NHKA after objecting to the wording of the church’s apology for apartheid. In March 2022 the High Court in Pretoria ruled that the congregations retained authority to transfer their properties and that “the NHKA was not a party to the donations, and therefore has no legal standing” to challenge the transfers. The court declined to interpret the church’s constitution, calling that an unnecessary use of judicial resources. The NHKA was considering an appeal.

Van der Vyver traced the dispute back more than a century. In Pretoria in 1894, the Supreme Court ruled a union of two congregations “ultra vires and therefore invalid” and gave property to those who stayed with the original congregation. The parties sold Church Square and its building to the ZAR government in 1899. The church was demolished in 1904, and the square passed to Pretoria’s municipal council in 1905 with a covenant forbidding future religious buildings.

The history shows that questions of who owns a church building after a split have been fought in South African courts for generations.

For Jamaican congregations, the key point is the one the Pretoria court relied on: who actually received and holds the property. If land is registered to local trustees rather than the denomination, the congregation may be able to take it with them when they leave. If it is held by the wider church, they may not. Knowing how a church’s property is held is the starting point for any conversation about unity, division or change.