Mahlangu and Another v Mahlangu and Others (341/2016) [2017] ZASCA 81 (2 June 2017)

Mahlangu and Another v Mahlangu and Others (341/2016) [2017] ZASCA 81 (2 June 2017)

The appeal was dismissed as moot because the principal relief sought—the reinstatement of the first appellant as acting traditional leader—could not be granted following his death. The second appellant's interest was neither articulated nor substantiated, and its standing was not established. The court found no live issue between the parties and no discrete legal issue of public importance warranting determination. The attorneys for the appellants were remiss in persisting with the appeal despite clear indications of mootness and were ordered to pay costs de bonis propriis for prosecuting a futile appeal.

Citation
[2017] ZASCA 81
Parties
Appellant: Joyina Jim Mahlangu; Appellant: Sokhulumi Royal Council; Respondent: Mkhamibi Petros Mahlangu; Respondent: MEC Local Government and Housing – Gauteng; Respondent: J B Tolo – Chairperson of the Commission on Traditional Leadership Disputes and Claims
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 June 2017
Case Number
341/2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Division of the High Court, Pretoria
Outcome
Appeal dismissed as moot under section 16(2)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013.
Judges
Cachalia, Majiedt, Petse, Zondi, Mathopo
Legal Topics
Traditional Leadership Disputes, Mootness, Review of Administrative Action, Standing, Costs De Bonis Propriis
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Traditional Leadership Disputes Mootness Review of Administrative Action Standing Costs De Bonis Propriis

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joyina Jim Mahlangu

Appellant

Sokhulumi Royal Council

Appellant

Mkhamibi Petros Mahlangu

Respondent

MEC Local Government and Housing – Gauteng

Respondent

J B Tolo – Chairperson of the Commission on Traditional Leadership Disputes and Claims

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Division of the High Court, Pretoria

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appeal has become moot due to the death of the first appellant.
  2. 2 Whether any judgment or order would have practical effect or result within the meaning of section 16(2)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013.
  3. 3 Whether the second appellant has standing or capacity to continue the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed as moot because the principal relief sought—the reinstatement of the first appellant as acting traditional leader—could not be granted following his death. The second appellant's interest was neither articulated nor substantiated, and its standing was not established. The court found no live issue between the parties and no discrete legal issue of public importance warranting determination. The attorneys for the appellants were remiss in persisting with the appeal despite clear indications of mootness and were ordered to pay costs de bonis propriis for prosecuting a futile appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed as moot under section 16(2)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed in terms of section 16(2)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013.
  • The appellants’ attorneys, Messrs Zehir Omar Attorneys, are ordered to pay the costs of the appeal de bonis propriis.