Khuis Communal Property Association v Gaotsenwe (77/2011) [2011] ZANCHC 26 (9 September 2011)

Khuis Communal Property Association v Gaotsenwe (77/2011) [2011] ZANCHC 26 (9 September 2011)

The court found that the applicant's committee was properly reinstated at the general meeting of 17 November 2010, and was authorised to bring the application. The respondent did not have permission from the committee to farm in the Garona Camp, and his claim of verbal permission from the chairperson was rejected as untenable and unsupported by evidence. The applicant has a clear right to allocate and control the use of its property, and the respondent's conduct constituted an infringement of those rights. The court held that the applicant was entitled to an order compelling the respondent to remove his livestock from the Garona Camp and to adhere to the allocation of the Stokwana Camp....

Citation
[2011] ZANCHC 26
Parties
Applicant: Khuis Communal Property Association; Respondent: Obiditse John Gaotsenwe
Court
Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 September 2011
Case Number
77/2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application granted in part; respondent ordered to adhere to allocation and remove livestock from Garona Camp; costs awarded to applicant.
Judges
C J Olivier
Legal Topics
Communal Property Associations Act, Allocation of Land Rights, Interdict, Committee Powers, Removal of Livestock
Land and Property Civil Procedure Communal Property Associations Act Allocation of Land Rights Interdict Committee Powers Removal of Livestock

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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khuis Communal Property Association

Applicant

Obiditse John Gaotsenwe

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's committee was properly constituted and authorised to bring the application.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent had permission to farm in the Garona Camp.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to an order compelling the respondent to remove his livestock from the Garona Camp.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's committee was properly reinstated at the general meeting of 17 November 2010, and was authorised to bring the application. The respondent did not have permission from the committee to farm in the Garona Camp, and his claim of verbal permission from the chairperson was rejected as untenable and unsupported by evidence. The applicant has a clear right to allocate and control the use of its property, and the respondent's conduct constituted an infringement of those rights. The court held that the applicant was entitled to an order compelling the respondent to remove his livestock from the Garona Camp and to adhere to the allocation of the Stokwana Camp....

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; respondent ordered to adhere to allocation and remove livestock from Garona Camp; costs awarded to applicant.

Orders

  • The respondent shall adhere to the decision taken by the applicant whereby he was allowed to farm in the Stokwana Camp of the farm Khuis 181.
  • The respondent shall remove his livestock from the Garona Camp of the farm Police 180 within 30 days of this order.