Exxaro Coal (Pty) Limited and Another v Sindane and Others (LCC66/2022) [2024] ZALCC 10 (25 March 2024)

Exxaro Coal (Pty) Limited and Another v Sindane and Others (LCC66/2022) [2024] ZALCC 10 (25 March 2024)

The court found that the explanation for the delay in filing the application for leave to appeal was unreasonable, particularly during the December period when the occupiers were legally represented and no steps were taken to comply with the court order. The attorneys failed to act timeously or communicate with the other party or the court. The January delay was partially understandable due to difficulties in securing new representation, but this did not excuse the earlier failure. The prospects of success on appeal were found to be low, as the grounds of appeal were not persuasive and the issue regarding the signature of Mr Frans Sindane did not warrant referral to oral evidence. The...

Citation
[2024] ZALCC 10
Parties
Applicant: Exxaro Coal (Pty) Limited; Applicant: Exxaro Coal Mpumalanga (Pty) Limited; Respondent: Vusimuzi Charles Sindane; Respondent: Zandile Gertrude Zwane; Respondent: Calvin Phumlane Sindane; Respondent: Nothando Sindane; Respondent: Badanile Rose Sindane; Respondent: Johanna Sindane; Respondent: Julia Sindane; Respondent: Kleinbooi Sindane; Respondent: Elisa Nomadlozi Sindane; Respondent: Felicia Tryphina Masango; Respondent: The Sindane Family; Respondent: Mthobisi Wesley Khumalo; Respondent: The Director-General Department of Agriculture Rural Development and Land Reform; Respondent: Emakhazeni Local Municipality
Court
Land Claims Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 March 2024
Case Number
LCC66/2022
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Condonation for Late Filing of Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Condonation for the late filing of the application for leave to appeal is refused. No order as to costs.
Judges
SJ Cowen
Legal Topics
Condonation, Eviction, Leave to Appeal, Prospects of Success, Court Rules Compliance
Land and Property Civil Procedure Condonation Eviction Leave to Appeal Prospects of Success Court Rules Compliance

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Exxaro Coal (Pty) Limited

Applicant

Exxaro Coal Mpumalanga (Pty) Limited

Applicant

Vusimuzi Charles Sindane

Respondent

Zandile Gertrude Zwane

Respondent

Calvin Phumlane Sindane

Respondent

Nothando Sindane

Respondent

Badanile Rose Sindane

Respondent

Johanna Sindane

Respondent

Julia Sindane

Respondent

Kleinbooi Sindane

Respondent

Elisa Nomadlozi Sindane

Respondent

Felicia Tryphina Masango

Respondent

The Sindane Family

Respondent

Mthobisi Wesley Khumalo

Respondent

The Director-General Department of Agriculture Rural Development and Land Reform

Respondent

Emakhazeni Local Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Condonation for Late Filing of Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation should be granted for the late filing of the application for leave to appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the explanation for the delay is reasonable and covers the entire period.
  3. 3 Whether the prospects of success on appeal justify granting condonation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the explanation for the delay in filing the application for leave to appeal was unreasonable, particularly during the December period when the occupiers were legally represented and no steps were taken to comply with the court order. The attorneys failed to act timeously or communicate with the other party or the court. The January delay was partially understandable due to difficulties in securing new representation, but this did not excuse the earlier failure. The prospects of success on appeal were found to be low, as the grounds of appeal were not persuasive and the issue regarding the signature of Mr Frans Sindane did not warrant referral to oral evidence. The...

Court Disposition

Condonation for the late filing of the application for leave to appeal is refused. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • The first to twelfth respondents’ application for condonation for the late filing of their application for leave to appeal is refused.
  • There is no order as to costs.