Moletele Community and Others v Telkom SA SOC Ltd (LCC206/2010) [2020] ZALCC 9 (9 October 2020)

Moletele Community and Others v Telkom SA SOC Ltd (LCC206/2010) [2020] ZALCC 9 (9 October 2020)

The court found that Telkom had not forfeited its right to contest the merits of the claim by not relying on section 34 of the Restitution of Land Rights Act. The separation of the issue of restorability was for convenience and did not preclude Telkom from raising its other pleaded defences should the court find against it on the separated issue. The main claimants' contention that Telkom had conceded the merits was unsupported by the pleadings or any express admission. The procedural point raised by the main claimants was found to be unsustainable and lacking merit. As a result, the court ordered that all issues in Telkom's plea remain part of the lis and imposed a punitive costs order...

Citation
[2020] ZALCC 9
Parties
Applicant: Moletele Community; Applicant: Heir Prince-Maekane Tribal Community; Applicant: Kgosi Lackson Abuthi Chiloane on behalf of Moletele Tribe; Applicant: Moletele-Blydepoort Community; Respondent: Telkom SA SOC Ltd
Court
Land Claims Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 October 2020
Case Number
LCC206/2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Separation of Issues and Costs
Outcome
The court ruled that all issues raised in Telkom's plea remain part of the dispute and that the separation of the restorability issue does not preclude Telkom from raising other defences. The main claimants are ordered to pay costs on an attorney and client scale for this issue, excluding reserved costs for certain...
Judges
Spilg
Legal Topics
Restitution of Land Rights Act, Separation of Issues, Costs Order, Feasibility of Restoration
Land and Property Civil Procedure Restitution of Land Rights Act Separation of Issues Costs Order Feasibility of Restoration

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Moletele Community

Applicant

Heir Prince-Maekane Tribal Community

Applicant

Kgosi Lackson Abuthi Chiloane on behalf of Moletele Tribe

Applicant

Moletele-Blydepoort Community

Applicant

Telkom SA SOC Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Ruling on Separation of Issues and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Telkom forfeited its right to contest the merits of the claim by not relying on section 34 of the Restitution of Land Rights Act.
  2. 2 Whether the separation of the issue of restorability precludes Telkom from raising other pleaded defences.
  3. 3 Whether the main claimants should bear a punitive costs order for raising an unsustainable procedural point.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Telkom had not forfeited its right to contest the merits of the claim by not relying on section 34 of the Restitution of Land Rights Act. The separation of the issue of restorability was for convenience and did not preclude Telkom from raising its other pleaded defences should the court find against it on the separated issue. The main claimants' contention that Telkom had conceded the merits was unsupported by the pleadings or any express admission. The procedural point raised by the main claimants was found to be unsustainable and lacking merit. As a result, the court ordered that all issues in Telkom's plea remain part of the lis and imposed a punitive costs order...

Court Disposition

The court ruled that all issues raised in Telkom's plea remain part of the dispute and that the separation of the restorability issue does not preclude Telkom from raising other defences. The main claimants are ordered to pay costs on an attorney and client scale for this issue, excluding reserved costs for certain...

Orders

  • It is declared that the present lis between the main claimants and Telkom includes all issues put in dispute in Telkom's Pleading.
  • The order of 7 July 2020 separating the issue of restorability does not preclude Telkom from raising all its other pleaded defences should the court find against it in respect of the separated issue.