Beukes and Bekker: Re Farm Grootte Springfontein (LCC17/96) [1997] ZALCC 3 (24 July 1997)

Beukes and Bekker: Re Farm Grootte Springfontein (LCC17/96) [1997] ZALCC 3 (24 July 1997)

The Surplus Peoples Project's application to be admitted as amicus curiae was refused because it failed to advance submissions different from those of the parties, a crucial requirement under Rule 14(2)(b)(iii). The role of an amicus is to provide the court with perspectives or expertise not otherwise available from the parties. The Atlantis Reconstruction and Development Forum's application for leave to intervene was refused because it did not demonstrate a direct and substantial interest in the subject matter of the litigation, as required by Rule 13 and s 29(1) of the Restitution of Land Rights Act. Its interest was found to be developmental or commercial, not legal or directly...

Citation
[1997] ZALCC 3
Parties
Applicant: Beukes and Bekker; Respondent: Surplus Peoples Project; Respondent: Atlantis Reconstruction and Development Forum
Court
Land Claims Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 July 1997
Case Number
17/96
Procedural Posture
Leave to Intervene / Application for Leave to Intervene and Admission as Amicus Curiae
Outcome
Both applications for intervention and admission as amicus curiae were refused.
Judges
Y S Meer, A Gildenhuys
Legal Topics
Restitution of Land Rights Act, Intervention Procedure, Amicus Curiae Admission, Direct and Substantial Interest, Constitutional Interpretation
Land and Property Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Restitution of Land Rights Act Intervention Procedure Amicus Curiae Admission Direct and Substantial Interest Constitutional Interpretation

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 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Beukes and Bekker

Applicant

Surplus Peoples Project

Respondent

Atlantis Reconstruction and Development Forum

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Intervene / Application for Leave to Intervene and Admission as Amicus Curiae

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Surplus Peoples Project should be admitted as amicus curiae under Rule 14 of the Land Claims Court Rules.
  2. 2 Whether the Atlantis Reconstruction and Development Forum should be granted leave to intervene as a party under Rule 13 of the Land Claims Court Rules.
  3. 3 What constitutes a 'direct and substantial interest' or 'interested person' for purposes of intervention in restitution proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The Surplus Peoples Project's application to be admitted as amicus curiae was refused because it failed to advance submissions different from those of the parties, a crucial requirement under Rule 14(2)(b)(iii). The role of an amicus is to provide the court with perspectives or expertise not otherwise available from the parties. The Atlantis Reconstruction and Development Forum's application for leave to intervene was refused because it did not demonstrate a direct and substantial interest in the subject matter of the litigation, as required by Rule 13 and s 29(1) of the Restitution of Land Rights Act. Its interest was found to be developmental or commercial, not legal or directly...

Court Disposition

Both applications for intervention and admission as amicus curiae were refused.

Orders

  • No order is made on any of the prayers contained in the Surplus Peoples Project's application.
  • The Surplus Peoples Project is granted leave to renew the application on notice to the other parties, supplemented by further affidavits as required.