Davhana Royal Family and Another v Premier of Limpopo Province and Others (339/2019) [2023] ZALMPTHC 6 (18 April 2023)

Davhana Royal Family and Another v Premier of Limpopo Province and Others (339/2019) [2023] ZALMPTHC 6 (18 April 2023)

The court found that it had jurisdiction to hear the application as the adverse effects of the decision and the residence of key parties fell within its area. The fourth respondent's investigation was procedurally unfair and irrational, as it failed to conduct inspections in loco at all relevant sites, did not hold...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] ZALMPTHC 6
Parties
Applicant: Davhana Royal Family; Applicant: Khamusi Nesengani; Respondent: Premier of Limpopo Province; Respondent: MEC for Co-operative Governance Human Settlement and Traditional Affairs; Respondent: Chairperson of Limpopo Province Commission on Traditional Leadership Disputes and Claims; Respondent: Limpopo Provincial Commission on Traditional Leadership Disputes and Claim; Respondent: Nenngwekhulu Mandela Wilson; Respondent: Nnengwekhulu Royal Family; Respondent: Limpopo House of Traditional Leaders
Court
Limpopo High Court, Thohoyandou
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 April 2023
Case Number
339/2019
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application granted. The decision to restore Senior Traditional Leadership to the fifth respondent is reviewed and set aside. The claim is remitted for proper investigation.
Judges
MV Semenya
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Traditional Leadership Disputes, Jurisdiction of High Court, Procedural Fairness, Bias in Administrative Action
Administrative Law Land and Property Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Traditional Leadership Disputes Jurisdiction of High Court Procedural Fairness Bias in Administrative Action

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Davhana Royal Family

Applicant

Khamusi Nesengani

Applicant

Premier of Limpopo Province

Respondent

MEC for Co-operative Governance Human Settlement and Traditional Affairs

Respondent

Chairperson of Limpopo Province Commission on Traditional Leadership Disputes and Claims

Respondent

Limpopo Provincial Commission on Traditional Leadership Disputes and Claim

Respondent

Nenngwekhulu Mandela Wilson

Respondent

Nnengwekhulu Royal Family

Respondent

Limpopo House of Traditional Leaders

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Limpopo High Court, Thohoyandou, has jurisdiction to review the decision taken in Polokwane.
  2. 2 Whether the fourth respondent's investigation and recommendation regarding the restoration of traditional leadership was procedurally fair and rational.
  3. 3 Whether the decision to restore Senior Traditional Leadership to the fifth respondent was lawful and supported by evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that it had jurisdiction to hear the application as the adverse effects of the decision and the residence of key parties fell within its area. The fourth respondent's investigation was procedurally unfair and irrational, as it failed to conduct inspections in loco at all relevant sites, did not hold adequate public hearings or interviews, and ignored critical evidence regarding the historical status of the parties. The recommendation to restore Senior Traditional Leadership to the fifth respondent was not supported by the evidence and exceeded the fourth respondent's mandate. The court held that the administrative action was unlawful under PAJA and that the matter should...

Court Disposition

Application granted. The decision to restore Senior Traditional Leadership to the fifth respondent is reviewed and set aside. The claim is remitted for proper investigation.

Orders

  • The proceedings and findings recommending the fifth respondent's claim are reviewed and set aside.
  • The decision made by the first respondent dated 25 April 2018 approving the fifth respondent's claim of Senior Traditional Leadership is reviewed and set aside.