Landman and Another v Ndlozi, Landman and Another v Gama (LCC80/2003, LCC 81/2003) [2004] ZALCC 19; 2005 (4) SA 89 (LCC); [2005] 1 All SA 493 (LCC) (19 October 2004)

Landman and Another v Ndlozi, Landman and Another v Gama (LCC80/2003, LCC 81/2003) [2004] ZALCC 19; 2005 (4) SA 89 (LCC); [2005] 1 All SA 493 (LCC) (19 October 2004)

The court found that the respondents' remuneration was predominantly in the right to occupy and use land, including substantial grazing and housing rights, rather than in cash or other forms. Expert evidence established that the monetary value of grazing and housing far exceeded the cash salary and mealie-meal provided. The respondents and their families had long-standing residence and use rights, and their main income derived from livestock farming. The applicants conceded that grazing rights constituted a major portion of the respondents' remuneration. The court held that the respondents were not farmworkers but labour tenants as defined in the Labour Tenants Act. The requirements for...

Citation
[2004] ZALCC 19
Parties
Applicant: Johannes Abraham Landman; Applicant: Japie Olivier Landman; Respondent: Nayitsheni Ndlozi; Respondent: Mdubane Gama
Court
Land Claims Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 October 2004
Case Number
LCC 80/2003; LCC 81/2003
Procedural Posture
Eviction Application / Determination of Preliminary Issues (labour Tenant Status, Claim Lodgement, Eviction Notice)
Outcome
The respondents in both matters are declared labour tenants as defined in the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act. Their claims for acquisition of land were timeously lodged and proper notice of intended eviction was given. No cost orders are made.
Judges
A Gildenhuys
Legal Topics
Labour Tenant Definition, Eviction Proceedings, Extension of Security of Tenure Act, Land Reform Labour Tenants Act, Notice of Eviction, Valuation of Remuneration
Land and Property Civil Procedure Labour Tenant Definition Eviction Proceedings Extension of Security of Tenure Act Land Reform Labour Tenants Act Notice of Eviction Valuation of Remuneration

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Johannes Abraham Landman

Applicant

Japie Olivier Landman

Applicant

Nayitsheni Ndlozi

Respondent

Mdubane Gama

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Eviction Application / Determination of Preliminary Issues (labour Tenant Status, Claim Lodgement, Eviction Notice)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents are labour tenants as defined in the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act.
  2. 2 Whether the respondents have timeously lodged claims under Chapter III of the Labour Tenants Act.
  3. 3 Whether proper notice of intended eviction was given under section 11 of the Labour Tenants Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondents' remuneration was predominantly in the right to occupy and use land, including substantial grazing and housing rights, rather than in cash or other forms. Expert evidence established that the monetary value of grazing and housing far exceeded the cash salary and mealie-meal provided. The respondents and their families had long-standing residence and use rights, and their main income derived from livestock farming. The applicants conceded that grazing rights constituted a major portion of the respondents' remuneration. The court held that the respondents were not farmworkers but labour tenants as defined in the Labour Tenants Act. The requirements for...

Court Disposition

The respondents in both matters are declared labour tenants as defined in the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act. Their claims for acquisition of land were timeously lodged and proper notice of intended eviction was given. No cost orders are made.

Orders

  • It is declared that the respondent in case LCC 80/03 is a labour tenant as defined in the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act, No 3 of 1996.
  • It is declared that the respondent in case LCC 80/03 has timeously lodged a claim for acquisition of land under Chapter III of the said Act.