Mereki and Others v Moladora Trust and Another (CCT 121/24) [2025] ZACC 16 (1 August 2025)

Mereki and Others v Moladora Trust and Another (CCT 121/24) [2025] ZACC 16 (1 August 2025)

The Constitutional Court held that the applicants, as ESTA occupiers, had a right to graze cattle on the farm based on tacit consent, which was protected under ESTA. The Court found that the Trust failed to rebut the statutory presumption of consent triggered by the applicants' uninterrupted residence and use of the land. The termination of grazing rights constituted a deprivation of land use and required compliance with section 8 of ESTA. The Trust's reliance on common law termination was unlawful, as ESTA's procedural safeguards applied to both residence and associated land uses such as grazing. The Court emphasised that ESTA must be interpreted broadly to protect vulnerable occupiers'...

Citation
[2025] ZACC 16
Parties
Applicant: Magalone Mereki; Applicant: Topies Mereki; Applicant: Dikhotso Mereki; Respondent: Moladora Trust; Respondent: Department of Agriculture, Rural Development and Land Reform
Court
Constitutional Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 August 2025
Case Number
CCT 121/24
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From the Supreme Court of Appeal, Following Prior Proceedings in the Land Claims Court.
Outcome
Appeal upheld. Orders of the Supreme Court of Appeal set aside and replaced.
Judges
Madlanga ADCJ, Dambuza AJ, Goosen AJ, Kollapen J, Majiedt J, Opperman AJ, Rogers J, Theron J, Tshiqi J
Legal Topics
Extension of Security of Tenure Act, Tacit Consent, Termination of Land Rights, Eviction Procedure, Constitutional Interpretation, Presumption of Consent
Land and Property Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Extension of Security of Tenure Act Tacit Consent Termination of Land Rights Eviction Procedure Constitutional Interpretation +1 more

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 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Magalone Mereki

Applicant

Topies Mereki

Applicant

Dikhotso Mereki

Applicant

Moladora Trust

Respondent

Department of Agriculture, Rural Development and Land Reform

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From the Supreme Court of Appeal, Following Prior Proceedings in the Land Claims Court.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants had a right to graze cattle on the farm under ESTA.
  2. 2 Whether termination of grazing rights required compliance with ESTA procedures.
  3. 3 Whether tacit consent to graze cattle existed and was protected by ESTA.

Ratio Decidendi

The Constitutional Court held that the applicants, as ESTA occupiers, had a right to graze cattle on the farm based on tacit consent, which was protected under ESTA. The Court found that the Trust failed to rebut the statutory presumption of consent triggered by the applicants' uninterrupted residence and use of the land. The termination of grazing rights constituted a deprivation of land use and required compliance with section 8 of ESTA. The Trust's reliance on common law termination was unlawful, as ESTA's procedural safeguards applied to both residence and associated land uses such as grazing. The Court emphasised that ESTA must be interpreted broadly to protect vulnerable occupiers'...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld. Orders of the Supreme Court of Appeal set aside and replaced.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is granted.
  • The appeal succeeds.