FJ Albertse & others v MEC Economic, Small Business Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs & others (2452/2019) [2021] ZAFSHC 125 (19 May 2021)

FJ Albertse & others v MEC Economic, Small Business Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs & others (2452/2019) [2021] ZAFSHC 125 (19 May 2021)

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The grounds advanced were largely factual and repetitive of arguments previously considered and rejected. The authorities cited establish a high threshold for granting leave to appeal, requiring real and not fanciful prospects of success. The court was satisfied that the environmental impact was properly considered by the authorities, and that the Environmental Assessment Impact report was taken into account. No evidence was presented to show that the granting of Environmental Authorisation would cause harm to the environment. The applicants' objections were not raised during the...

Citation
[2021] ZAFSHC 125
Parties
Applicant: Frederik Jacobus Albertse; Applicant: Levina Francina Albertse; Applicant: Frederik Jacobus Albertse N.O; Applicant: Levina Francina Albertse N.O; Applicant: Nelmari Albertse Oosthysen N.O; Applicant: Jaco Albertse N.O; Respondent: The Member of the Executive Council: Economic, Small Business Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs, Free State Province; Respondent: The Head of the Department: Economic, Small Business Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs, Free State Province; Respondent: The Minister of Environmental Affairs of the Government of the Republic of South Africa; Respondent: Jacobus Adriaan Smith; Respondent: Jacobus Adriaan Smith N.O; Respondent: Cornelia Elizabeth Smith N.O; Respondent: Ancor Family Trust, IT 310/2003; Respondent: Nelesco 91 (Pty) Ltd
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 May 2021
Case Number
2452/2019
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Review Application
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
N.M. MBHELE, A.F. JORDAAN
Legal Topics
Environmental Authorisation, Review of Administrative Action, Leave to Appeal, Costs Award
Administrative Law Environmental Law Civil Procedure Environmental Authorisation Review of Administrative Action Leave to Appeal Costs Award

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Frederik Jacobus Albertse

Applicant

Levina Francina Albertse

Applicant

Frederik Jacobus Albertse N.O

Applicant

Levina Francina Albertse N.O

Applicant

Nelmari Albertse Oosthysen N.O

Applicant

Jaco Albertse N.O

Applicant

The Member of the Executive Council: Economic, Small Business Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs, Free State Province

Respondent

The Head of the Department: Economic, Small Business Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs, Free State Province

Respondent

The Minister of Environmental Affairs of the Government of the Republic of South Africa

Respondent

Jacobus Adriaan Smith

Respondent

Jacobus Adriaan Smith N.O

Respondent

Cornelia Elizabeth Smith N.O

Respondent

Ancor Family Trust, IT 310/2003

Respondent

Nelesco 91 (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the dismissal of their review application.
  2. 2 Whether the environmental impact was properly considered by the authorities when granting the Environmental Authorisation.
  3. 3 Whether the application for Environmental Authorisation was based on material misrepresentation or incorrect facts.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The grounds advanced were largely factual and repetitive of arguments previously considered and rejected. The authorities cited establish a high threshold for granting leave to appeal, requiring real and not fanciful prospects of success. The court was satisfied that the environmental impact was properly considered by the authorities, and that the Environmental Assessment Impact report was taken into account. No evidence was presented to show that the granting of Environmental Authorisation would cause harm to the environment. The applicants' objections were not raised during the...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.