Ekapa Minerals (Pty) Ltd and Others v Seekoei and Others (2057/2016) [2017] ZANCHC 5 (13 January 2017)

Ekapa Minerals (Pty) Ltd and Others v Seekoei and Others (2057/2016) [2017] ZANCHC 5 (13 January 2017)

The court found that the applicants established a clear right to final interdictory relief over the relevant immovable properties and tailings mineral resources, based on ownership, contractual rights, and occupation. The Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act does not apply to the tailings mineral resources in question, as they were not created by the holder of an old order right as defined in the Act. The sale and reprocessing of the tailings mineral resources are therefore lawful and do not require a mining right under the current statutory regime. The order sought was clarified and made sufficiently specific to be enforceable, and criminal prosecution was deemed not to be an...

Citation
[2017] ZANCHC 5
Parties
Applicant: Ekapa Minerals (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Kimberley Ekapa Mining Joint Venture; Applicant: Super Stone Mining (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Crown Resources (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Lucky Seekoei; Respondent: Godfrey Motloteng; Respondent: Pieter Mokitini; Respondent: Victor Taku; Respondent: John Motshwanaysi; Respondent: Daisy Damons; Respondent: The Unidentified Illegal Miners; Respondent: MEC: Department of Environmental Affairs; Respondent: MEC: Department of Cooperative Governances, Human Settlements and Traditional Affairs; Respondent: MEC: Department of Transport, Safety and Liaison; Respondent: Minister of Minerals Resources; Respondent: Minister of Safety and Security; Respondent: Minister of Home Affairs; Respondent: De Beers Consolidated Mines (Pty) Ltd
Court
Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 January 2017
Case Number
2057/2016
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Interdict Application
Outcome
Application granted. Final interdictory relief awarded to the applicants. Costs awarded against the first to sixth respondents and listed persons.
Judges
Williams
Legal Topics
Interdictory Relief, Mining Rights, Tailings Mineral Resources, Unlawful Occupation, Alternative Remedy, Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act
Land and Property Civil Procedure Environmental Law Interdictory Relief Mining Rights Tailings Mineral Resources Unlawful Occupation Alternative Remedy +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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ekapa Minerals (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Kimberley Ekapa Mining Joint Venture

Applicant

Super Stone Mining (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Crown Resources (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Lucky Seekoei

Respondent

Godfrey Motloteng

Respondent

Pieter Mokitini

Respondent

Victor Taku

Respondent

John Motshwanaysi

Respondent

Daisy Damons

Respondent

The Unidentified Illegal Miners

Respondent

MEC: Department of Environmental Affairs

Respondent

MEC: Department of Cooperative Governances, Human Settlements and Traditional Affairs

Respondent

MEC: Department of Transport, Safety and Liaison

Respondent

Minister of Minerals Resources

Respondent

Minister of Safety and Security

Respondent

Minister of Home Affairs

Respondent

De Beers Consolidated Mines (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Final Interdict Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have a clear right to final interdictory relief over the immovable properties and tailings mineral resources.
  2. 2 Whether the respondents' mining activities are unlawful and subject to interdict.
  3. 3 Whether the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act applies to the tailings mineral resources in question.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants established a clear right to final interdictory relief over the relevant immovable properties and tailings mineral resources, based on ownership, contractual rights, and occupation. The Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act does not apply to the tailings mineral resources in question, as they were not created by the holder of an old order right as defined in the Act. The sale and reprocessing of the tailings mineral resources are therefore lawful and do not require a mining right under the current statutory regime. The order sought was clarified and made sufficiently specific to be enforceable, and criminal prosecution was deemed not to be an...

Court Disposition

Application granted. Final interdictory relief awarded to the applicants. Costs awarded against the first to sixth respondents and listed persons.

Orders

  • The first to sixth respondents and persons listed on Annexure X are interdicted and restrained from entering or being on the specified immovable properties and any tailings mineral resources situated thereon.
  • The first to sixth respondents and persons listed on Annexure X are interdicted and restrained from disturbing, processing, or removing any materials forming part of the tailings mineral resources on the specified properties.