Desmond Ettienne Doman v Kgabo Gabriel Selomo (20455/2014) [2015] ZASCA 124 (21 September 2015)

Desmond Ettienne Doman v Kgabo Gabriel Selomo (20455/2014) [2015] ZASCA 124 (21 September 2015)

The Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on the basis that the judgment sought would have no practical effect or result, as the burial had already taken place more than two and a half years prior. The appellant conceded that exhumation would be highly offensive and impractical, and the respondent did not insist on a costs order. The court specifically refrained from endorsing the reasoning of the court below regarding entitlement under the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act, as this was not raised in the papers or argued. The appeal was dismissed in terms of section 16(2)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act.

Citation
[2015] ZASCA 124
Parties
Appellant: Desmond Ettienne Doman; Respondent: Kgabo Gabriel Selomo
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 September 2015
Case Number
20455/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Dismissed on Mootness Grounds
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with no order as to costs.
Judges
Navsa, Theron, Swain, Mbha, Baartman
Legal Topics
Extension of Security of Tenure Act, Mootness, Burial Rights, Land Reform Labour Tenants Act
Land and Property Civil Procedure Extension of Security of Tenure Act Mootness Burial Rights Land Reform Labour Tenants Act

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Desmond Ettienne Doman

Appellant

Kgabo Gabriel Selomo

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Dismissed on Mootness Grounds

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appeal has any practical effect or result in terms of section 16(2)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant is entitled to relief regarding burial rights under ESTA or the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act.
  3. 3 Whether the judgment below should stand as precedent for future burial claims on the farm.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on the basis that the judgment sought would have no practical effect or result, as the burial had already taken place more than two and a half years prior. The appellant conceded that exhumation would be highly offensive and impractical, and the respondent did not insist on a costs order. The court specifically refrained from endorsing the reasoning of the court below regarding entitlement under the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act, as this was not raised in the papers or argued. The appeal was dismissed in terms of section 16(2)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.