Mogale and Others v Mashigo and Others (1221/12) [2013] ZANWHC 3 (17 January 2013)
The court found that the applicants had established locus standi through confirmatory affidavits and by acting in terms of section 38 of the Constitution, which permits litigation in the interest of a group or class. The previous urgent application was dismissed solely on the issue of urgency and did not address the merits, thus res judicata does not apply. The non-joinder of Kgosi Bob Edward Mogale was not fatal to the remaining prayers, as the relief sought could be granted without prejudicing his interests. The applicants were not in contempt of the previous court order, as they were not parties to those proceedings and did not act jointly with Kgosi. The defence of lis alibi pendens...
- Citation
- [2013] ZANWHC 3
- Parties
- Applicant: Kgosi Bob Edward Mogale; Applicant: Radibokonyane Emaus Mogale; Applicant: Jorge Lucas Mogale; Applicant: Ramogapi Israel Moerane; Applicant: Meschak Joseph Mogale; Applicant: Solly Bute Mogale; Applicant: Julius Mogale; Applicant: Abinal Ophinal Moletsane; Applicant: Oupa Mokomele; Applicant: Churchill Albanius Madumo; Applicant: Mange Eliphus Magwete; Applicant: Martin Makoe; Applicant: Mary Majoaki Petlele; Applicant: Monty Daniel Mafate; Applicant: Moitsheki Dinah Raleru; Applicant: Marang Silas Kwapeng; Applicant: Mtsi Modisakeng; Applicant: Tiny Senakaleng Mogale; Respondent: Itumeleng Moerane Mashigo; Respondent: Baile Mogale; Respondent: Sheila Moerane Tlhatlotsi; Respondent: Eggie Maimane; Respondent: Elias Ratsheki Maimane; Respondent: Freddie Mogale; Respondent: Philius Rakgatla Mogale; Respondent: Ronnie M Moerane; Respondent: Toikie William Maimane; Respondent: Itumeleng Maimane; Respondent: Charles Mogale; Respondent: George Rangenga Mogale; Respondent: John Moerane; Respondent: Leslie Maimane; Respondent: Reuben Kaise; Respondent: Monageng Monana; Respondent: Ronnie Moerane; Respondent: Nicky Madupe; Respondent: Phistus Mogale; Respondent: Matlakala Mogale; Respondent: Oupa Mashike; Respondent: Johannes Modisakeng; Respondent: Ephraime Moralo; Respondent: Simon Mataboge; Respondent: Charles Kgosiemang; Respondent: Rodrick Monama; Respondent: George Mogale; Respondent: Premier of the North West Provincial Government; Respondent: MEC, Northwest Provincial Government for Local Government and Traditional Affairs; Respondent: PWC (Price Waterhouse Coopers)
- Court
- North West High Court, Mafikeng
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 17 January 2013
- Case Number
- 1221/12
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Opposed Motion; Points in Limine
- Outcome
- All points in limine raised by the first to fourteenth respondents are dismissed with costs.
- Judges
- Kgoele
- Legal Topics
- Customary Leadership Dispute, Locus Standi, Res Judicata, Lis Alibi Pendens, Non Joinder, Interdict
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Kgosi Bob Edward Mogale
Applicant
Radibokonyane Emaus Mogale
Applicant
Jorge Lucas Mogale
Applicant
Ramogapi Israel Moerane
Applicant
Meschak Joseph Mogale
Applicant
Solly Bute Mogale
Applicant
Julius Mogale
Applicant
Abinal Ophinal Moletsane
Applicant
Oupa Mokomele
Applicant
Churchill Albanius Madumo
Applicant
Mange Eliphus Magwete
Applicant
Martin Makoe
Applicant
Mary Majoaki Petlele
Applicant
Monty Daniel Mafate
Applicant
Moitsheki Dinah Raleru
Applicant
Marang Silas Kwapeng
Applicant
Mtsi Modisakeng
Applicant
Tiny Senakaleng Mogale
Applicant
Itumeleng Moerane Mashigo
Respondent
Baile Mogale
Respondent
Sheila Moerane Tlhatlotsi
Respondent
Eggie Maimane
Respondent
Elias Ratsheki Maimane
Respondent
Freddie Mogale
Respondent
Philius Rakgatla Mogale
Respondent
Ronnie M Moerane
Respondent
Toikie William Maimane
Respondent
Itumeleng Maimane
Respondent
Charles Mogale
Respondent
George Rangenga Mogale
Respondent
John Moerane
Respondent
Leslie Maimane
Respondent
Reuben Kaise
Respondent
Monageng Monana
Respondent
Ronnie Moerane
Respondent
Nicky Madupe
Respondent
Phistus Mogale
Respondent
Matlakala Mogale
Respondent
Oupa Mashike
Respondent
Johannes Modisakeng
Respondent
Ephraime Moralo
Respondent
Simon Mataboge
Respondent
Charles Kgosiemang
Respondent
Rodrick Monama
Respondent
George Mogale
Respondent
Premier of the North West Provincial Government
Respondent
MEC, Northwest Provincial Government for Local Government and Traditional Affairs
Respondent
PWC (Price Waterhouse Coopers)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Opposed Motion; Points in Limine
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicants have locus standi to bring the application on behalf of the Bapo Ba Mogale Community.
- 2 Whether the matter is res judicata due to previous urgent application dismissal.
- 3 Whether there is non-joinder of Kgosi Bob Edward Mogale for the remaining prayers.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicants had established locus standi through confirmatory affidavits and by acting in terms of section 38 of the Constitution, which permits litigation in the interest of a group or class. The previous urgent application was dismissed solely on the issue of urgency and did not address the merits, thus res judicata does not apply. The non-joinder of Kgosi Bob Edward Mogale was not fatal to the remaining prayers, as the relief sought could be granted without prejudicing his interests. The applicants were not in contempt of the previous court order, as they were not parties to those proceedings and did not act jointly with Kgosi. The defence of lis alibi pendens...
Court Disposition
All points in limine raised by the first to fourteenth respondents are dismissed with costs.
Orders
- All points in limine raised by the first to fourteenth respondents are dismissed with costs.
- Costs are awarded against the first to fourteenth respondents, jointly and severally, the one paying the other to be absolved.
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