Baleni and Others v Regional Manager Eastern Cape Department of Mineral Resources and Others (96628/2015) [2020] ZAGPPHC 485; [2020] 4 All SA 374 (GP); 2021 (1) SA 110 (GP) (11 September 2020)

Baleni and Others v Regional Manager Eastern Cape Department of Mineral Resources and Others (96628/2015) [2020] ZAGPPHC 485; [2020] 4 All SA 374 (GP); 2021 (1) SA 110 (GP) (11 September 2020)

The court held that, on a proper interpretation of sections 10(1) and 22(4) of the MPRDA, interested and affected parties are entitled, upon request to the Regional Manager, to be furnished with a copy of a mining right application, subject to redaction of financially sensitive information. The court found that the PAIA process is not a viable or practical alternative for such parties due to truncated timelines and capacity constraints, and that meaningful consultation requires timely access to the application. The court exercised its discretion to grant declaratory relief despite the respondent's argument that the matter was moot, noting the ongoing relevance of the issue for future...

Citation
[2020] ZAGPPHC 485
Parties
Applicant: Duduzile Baleni; Applicant: Makati Ndovela; Applicant: Mabhude Danca; Applicant: Gcinamadla Mthwa; Applicant: Mdumiseni Dlamini; Applicant: Maliyeza Denge; Applicant: 84 Others listed in Annexure A; Respondent: Regional Manager: Eastern Cape Department of Mineral Resources; Respondent: Deputy Director General: Mineral Regulation – Department of Mineral Resources; Respondent: Director General – Department of Mineral Resources; Respondent: Minister – Department of Mineral Resources; Respondent: Transworld Energy and Mineral Resources (SA) Pty Ltd; Amicus Curiae: Centre for Applied Legal Studies
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 September 2020
Case Number
96628/2015
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Application for Declaratory Relief Regarding Access to Mining Right Application
Outcome
Application granted. Declaratory relief issued in favour of the applicants.
Judges
MAKHUBELE
Legal Topics
Mining Rights Application, Consultation With Affected Parties, Access to Information, Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Sustainable Development, Declaratory Relief
Administrative Law Land and Property Environmental Law Mining Rights Application Consultation With Affected Parties Access to Information Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Sustainable Development +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Duduzile Baleni

Applicant

Makati Ndovela

Applicant

Mabhude Danca

Applicant

Gcinamadla Mthwa

Applicant

Mdumiseni Dlamini

Applicant

Maliyeza Denge

Applicant

84 Others listed in Annexure A

Applicant

Regional Manager: Eastern Cape Department of Mineral Resources

Respondent

Deputy Director General: Mineral Regulation – Department of Mineral Resources

Respondent

Director General – Department of Mineral Resources

Respondent

Minister – Department of Mineral Resources

Respondent

Transworld Energy and Mineral Resources (SA) Pty Ltd

Respondent

Centre for Applied Legal Studies

Amicus Curiae

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Application for Declaratory Relief Regarding Access to Mining Right Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interested and affected parties are entitled as of right to a copy of a mining right application under sections 10(1) and 22(4) of the MPRDA.
  2. 2 Whether the relief sought is academic given the subsequent provision of documents by the fifth respondent.
  3. 3 Whether access to the mining right application must be sought via PAIA or directly from the Regional Manager under the MPRDA.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, on a proper interpretation of sections 10(1) and 22(4) of the MPRDA, interested and affected parties are entitled, upon request to the Regional Manager, to be furnished with a copy of a mining right application, subject to redaction of financially sensitive information. The court found that the PAIA process is not a viable or practical alternative for such parties due to truncated timelines and capacity constraints, and that meaningful consultation requires timely access to the application. The court exercised its discretion to grant declaratory relief despite the respondent's argument that the matter was moot, noting the ongoing relevance of the issue for future...

Court Disposition

Application granted. Declaratory relief issued in favour of the applicants.

Orders

  • It is declared that interested and affected parties as contemplated by the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act 28 of 2002 are entitled by sections 10(1) and 22(4) of the MPRDA, on request to the relevant Regional Manager of the Department of Mineral Resources, to be furnished with a copy of an...
  • The fifth respondent is ordered to pay the costs of both the applicants and the Amicus Curiae.