Mashamaite and Others v Mogalakwena Local Municipality and Others, Member of the executive Council for Coghsta, Limpopo and Another v Kekana and Others (523/2016, 548/2016) [2017] ZASCA 43; [2017] 2 All SA 740 (SCA) (30 March 2017)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the High Court was precluded from granting reinstatement to Kekana due to the doctrine of res judicata, as the same relief had previously been sought and dismissed. The court found that Kekana, being on suspension, lacked authority to act on behalf of the municipality at the time of instituting proceedings. Several orders were rendered moot by subsequent events, including local government elections and Kekana's dismissal. The contempt order against the MEC was set aside, as the requirements of wilfulness and mala fides were not met and there was uncertainty regarding service of the order. The costs order against the appellants was also set aside, as...
- Citation
- [2017] ZASCA 43
- Parties
- Appellant: Tlhalefi Andries Mashamaite; Appellant: L D Langa; Appellant: N S Montane; Appellant: M A Tsebe; Appellant: M R Lebelo; Appellant: Vaaltÿn Kekana; Appellant: Sanny Tlhaku; Appellant: Lesiba Jacob Mashala; Appellant: Lesiba Jackson Mathebathe; Appellant: Ramasela Linah Mahlaela; Appellant: Mokgaeti Francinah Mutshimya; Appellant: Ramokone Minky Molekoa; Appellant: David Magongoa; Appellant: Lesetja Charles Kganyago; Appellant: Monicca Senoamadi; Appellant: Ernest Ranthupa; Appellant: Nelson Ngwetjana; Appellant: Nakedi Mabula; Appellant: Nelly Monene; Appellant: Lesiba Jairus Lebelo; Appellant: L G Legodi; Appellant: Emily Manganye; Appellant: Lebogang Brenda Mokgotho; Appellant: Maphuthi Rahab Lebelo; Appellant: Mamma Miloana; Appellant: Enock Manamela; Appellant: Lawrence Somo; Appellant: Raisibe Andrina Matsemela; Appellant: Zunaid Surtee; Appellant: Mankopane Michael Rapatsa; Appellant: Malesela Frans Mokwele; Appellant: Lesetja Phillemon Eric Gwangwa; Appellant: Mahlodi Josephine Madiba; Appellant: Madibana Cathy Lentsoane; Appellant: Mapula Shirley Tefu; Appellant: Mankale Solomon Molaba; Respondent: Mogalakwena Local Municipality; Respondent: Shella William Kekana; Respondent: Member of the Executive Council for Coghsta, Limpopo
- Court
- Supreme Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 30 March 2017
- Case Number
- 523/2016, 548/2016
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Division of the High Court, Pretoria
- Outcome
- Appeal upheld; application dismissed; costs awarded to appellants including costs of two counsel.
- Judges
- Maya, Theron, Dambuza, Fourie, Schippers
- Legal Topics
- Res Judicata, Municipal Governance, Contempt of Court, Motion Proceedings, Costs Award
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Tlhalefi Andries Mashamaite
Appellant
L D Langa
Appellant
N S Montane
Appellant
M A Tsebe
Appellant
M R Lebelo
Appellant
Vaaltÿn Kekana
Appellant
Sanny Tlhaku
Appellant
Lesiba Jacob Mashala
Appellant
Lesiba Jackson Mathebathe
Appellant
Ramasela Linah Mahlaela
Appellant
Mokgaeti Francinah Mutshimya
Appellant
Ramokone Minky Molekoa
Appellant
David Magongoa
Appellant
Lesetja Charles Kganyago
Appellant
Monicca Senoamadi
Appellant
Ernest Ranthupa
Appellant
Nelson Ngwetjana
Appellant
Nakedi Mabula
Appellant
Nelly Monene
Appellant
Lesiba Jairus Lebelo
Appellant
L G Legodi
Appellant
Emily Manganye
Appellant
Lebogang Brenda Mokgotho
Appellant
Maphuthi Rahab Lebelo
Appellant
Mamma Miloana
Appellant
Enock Manamela
Appellant
Lawrence Somo
Appellant
Raisibe Andrina Matsemela
Appellant
Zunaid Surtee
Appellant
Mankopane Michael Rapatsa
Appellant
Malesela Frans Mokwele
Appellant
Lesetja Phillemon Eric Gwangwa
Appellant
Mahlodi Josephine Madiba
Appellant
Madibana Cathy Lentsoane
Appellant
Mapula Shirley Tefu
Appellant
Mankale Solomon Molaba
Appellant
Mogalakwena Local Municipality
Respondent
Shella William Kekana
Respondent
Member of the Executive Council for Coghsta, Limpopo
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Division of the High Court, Pretoria
Legal Issues
- 1 Was the court a quo precluded from granting reinstatement on the basis of res judicata?
- 2 Did Kekana have authority to institute proceedings on behalf of the municipality?
- 3 Are some of the orders appealed against moot?
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the High Court was precluded from granting reinstatement to Kekana due to the doctrine of res judicata, as the same relief had previously been sought and dismissed. The court found that Kekana, being on suspension, lacked authority to act on behalf of the municipality at the time of instituting proceedings. Several orders were rendered moot by subsequent events, including local government elections and Kekana's dismissal. The contempt order against the MEC was set aside, as the requirements of wilfulness and mala fides were not met and there was uncertainty regarding service of the order. The costs order against the appellants was also set aside, as...
Court Disposition
Appeal upheld; application dismissed; costs awarded to appellants including costs of two counsel.
Orders
- The appeal is upheld with costs including the costs of two counsel.
- The order of the court a quo is set aside and substituted with: (a) The application is dismissed. (b) The second applicant is directed to pay the costs of the application including the costs of two counsel. (c) The second applicant is directed to pay the costs reserved on 23 December 2014.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment