Mothapo and Another v Mothapo and Others (1247/2014) [2017] ZALMPPHC 43 (13 December 2017)

Mothapo and Another v Mothapo and Others (1247/2014) [2017] ZALMPPHC 43 (13 December 2017)

The court found that the first plaintiff, although appointed as Acting Kgoshigadi in 1987, had her appointment recognised by the Premier as evidenced by the COGHSTA letter and the original certificate. The lack of annual review by the Premier was not fatal to her locus standi, as the plaintiffs could have compelled the Premier to act, and the surrounding circumstances and documentary evidence sufficed under the minimum evidence test. The challenge to her royal lineage was unsubstantiated and abandoned. In contrast, the second plaintiff failed to comply with the statutory requirements for the composition and recognition of a traditional council under Act 6 of 2005, including the inclusion...

Citation
[2017] ZALMPPHC 43
Parties
Plaintiff: Kgoshigadi Madipoane Refiloe Moremadi Mothapo; Plaintiff: Bakgaga-Ba-Mothapo Traditional Council; Defendant: Tshepo Mathule Mothapo
Court
Limpopo High Court, Polokwane
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 December 2017
Case Number
1247/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Special Pleas on Locus Standi
Outcome
Special plea of lack of locus standi against the first plaintiff dismissed; special plea of lack of locus standi against the second plaintiff upheld; costs in the main action.
Judges
Sikhwari
Legal Topics
Locus Standi, Traditional Leadership, Composition of Traditional Council, Recognition by Premier
Civil Procedure Land and Property Locus Standi Traditional Leadership Composition of Traditional Council Recognition by Premier

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kgoshigadi Madipoane Refiloe Moremadi Mothapo

Plaintiff

Bakgaga-Ba-Mothapo Traditional Council

Plaintiff

Tshepo Mathule Mothapo

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Special Pleas on Locus Standi

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first plaintiff has locus standi to act as plaintiff in the proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the second plaintiff, Bakgaga-Ba-Mothapo Traditional Council, has locus standi as a legally recognised traditional council.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the first plaintiff, although appointed as Acting Kgoshigadi in 1987, had her appointment recognised by the Premier as evidenced by the COGHSTA letter and the original certificate. The lack of annual review by the Premier was not fatal to her locus standi, as the plaintiffs could have compelled the Premier to act, and the surrounding circumstances and documentary evidence sufficed under the minimum evidence test. The challenge to her royal lineage was unsubstantiated and abandoned. In contrast, the second plaintiff failed to comply with the statutory requirements for the composition and recognition of a traditional council under Act 6 of 2005, including the inclusion...

Court Disposition

Special plea of lack of locus standi against the first plaintiff dismissed; special plea of lack of locus standi against the second plaintiff upheld; costs in the main action.

Orders

  • The special plea for first plaintiff’s lack of locus standi is dismissed.
  • The special plea for second plaintiff’s lack of locus standi is upheld.