Makgoba and Others v Ledwaba NO and Others (16046/2017) [2017] ZAGPPHC 564 (23 August 2017)

Makgoba and Others v Ledwaba NO and Others (16046/2017) [2017] ZAGPPHC 564 (23 August 2017)

The court found that the order requiring the applicants to resign as trustees was not appealable, as it did not dispose of any substantial portion of the issues between the parties. The main dispute concerned the verification of beneficiaries, not the identity of trustees. The applicants' tenure had expired, and their removal was substantively justified, notwithstanding the technical error by the Master. The order provided for the appointment of independent trustees to maintain the trust's functionality. The application for leave to appeal was deemed an abuse of process, intended to delay relinquishing control over the trust. There were no reasonable prospects of success or compelling...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 564
Parties
Applicant: Thupane Joseph Makgoba; Applicant: Tfhigo Frans Magoele; Applicant: Grace Mahlodi Mashaba; Applicant: Motlokwa Suzan Mojapelo; Applicant: Samuel Masetla; Applicant: Joseph Motswi; Applicant: Motlatso Ivy Magoele; Applicant: Mantila Ronny Hlokwa; Applicant: Ajita Simon Asiti; Applicant: Thetele Joseph Malatji; Applicant: Refilwe Irene Letsoalo; Applicant: Matlou Jacqueline Makgoba; Applicant: Makgoba Asset Management (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Mpoyana Lazarus Ledwaba N.O.; Respondent: Gisela Stols N.O.; Respondent: Master of the High Court, Gauteng Division; Respondent: Minister for Rural Development and Land Reform; Respondent: Provincial Shared Services Centre of the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform, Limpopo Province; Respondent: Regional Land Claims Commissioner, Limpopo Province; Respondent: Mamphoku Makgoba Community Steering Committee
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 August 2017
Case Number
16046/2017
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Urgent Application Order
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
TM Makgoka
Legal Topics
Trustee Removal, Leave to Appeal, Trust Property Control Act, Land Restitution, Appealability of Orders
Land and Property Civil Procedure Trustee Removal Leave to Appeal Trust Property Control Act Land Restitution Appealability of Orders

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thupane Joseph Makgoba

Applicant

Tfhigo Frans Magoele

Applicant

Grace Mahlodi Mashaba

Applicant

Motlokwa Suzan Mojapelo

Applicant

Samuel Masetla

Applicant

Joseph Motswi

Applicant

Motlatso Ivy Magoele

Applicant

Mantila Ronny Hlokwa

Applicant

Ajita Simon Asiti

Applicant

Thetele Joseph Malatji

Applicant

Refilwe Irene Letsoalo

Applicant

Matlou Jacqueline Makgoba

Applicant

Makgoba Asset Management (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Mpoyana Lazarus Ledwaba N.O.

Respondent

Gisela Stols N.O.

Respondent

Master of the High Court, Gauteng Division

Respondent

Minister for Rural Development and Land Reform

Respondent

Provincial Shared Services Centre of the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform, Limpopo Province

Respondent

Regional Land Claims Commissioner, Limpopo Province

Respondent

Mamphoku Makgoba Community Steering Committee

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Urgent Application Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the portion of the order requiring applicants to resign as trustees is appealable.
  2. 2 Whether there are reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion regarding the resignation order.
  3. 3 Whether compelling reasons exist for granting leave to appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the order requiring the applicants to resign as trustees was not appealable, as it did not dispose of any substantial portion of the issues between the parties. The main dispute concerned the verification of beneficiaries, not the identity of trustees. The applicants' tenure had expired, and their removal was substantively justified, notwithstanding the technical error by the Master. The order provided for the appointment of independent trustees to maintain the trust's functionality. The application for leave to appeal was deemed an abuse of process, intended to delay relinquishing control over the trust. There were no reasonable prospects of success or compelling...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application by the first to thirteenth applicants for leave to appeal against the order of 13 April 2017 is dismissed with costs, such costs to be paid jointly and severally, the one paying the others to be absolved.