Msomi v Train NO and Others (LCC 95/2009) [2010] ZALCC 32 (10 December 2010)

Msomi v Train NO and Others (LCC 95/2009) [2010] ZALCC 32 (10 December 2010)

The court found that the plaintiff satisfied all three paragraphs of the definition of a labour tenant under the Act. The plaintiff resides on the farm, has or had the right to crop and graze, and these rights were exercised in exchange for labour provided to the landowner. The evidence showed that the monetary payments received by the plaintiff and his father were insufficient for survival, and the rights to crop and graze were granted as part of the consideration for their labour. The court considered the totality of the relationship, the agreements, and the probabilities, noting the unequal and informal nature of labour tenancy arrangements. The presumption that the plaintiff is not a...

Citation
[2010] ZALCC 32
Parties
Plaintiff: Mbela Sondela Msomi; Defendant: Peter Landale Train N.O.; Defendant: Robert Landale Mackenzie Train N.O.; Defendant: Gillian Train N.O.; Defendant: Gala Property Trust; Defendant: WG Maxwell Investments (Pty) Ltd; Defendant: Director General, Department of Land Affairs
Court
Land Claims Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 December 2010
Case Number
LCC 95/2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Action / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff declared a labour tenant under Section 33(2A) of the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act 3 of 1996.
Judges
Ncube AJ
Legal Topics
Labour Tenancy, Land Reform Labour Tenants Act, Definition of Labour Tenant, Onus of Proof, Rights to Crop and Graze, Family Connection to Land
Land and Property Labour Tenancy Land Reform Labour Tenants Act Definition of Labour Tenant Onus of Proof Rights to Crop and Graze Family Connection to Land

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

Parties

Mbela Sondela Msomi

Plaintiff

Peter Landale Train N.O.

Defendant

Robert Landale Mackenzie Train N.O.

Defendant

Gillian Train N.O.

Defendant

Gala Property Trust

Defendant

WG Maxwell Investments (Pty) Ltd

Defendant

Director General, Department of Land Affairs

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff qualifies as a labour tenant under Section 1 of the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act 3 of 1996.
  2. 2 Whether the rights to crop and graze were exercised in exchange for labour provided to the landowner.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff's parent met the requirements of paragraph (c) of the definition of labour tenant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff satisfied all three paragraphs of the definition of a labour tenant under the Act. The plaintiff resides on the farm, has or had the right to crop and graze, and these rights were exercised in exchange for labour provided to the landowner. The evidence showed that the monetary payments received by the plaintiff and his father were insufficient for survival, and the rights to crop and graze were granted as part of the consideration for their labour. The court considered the totality of the relationship, the agreements, and the probabilities, noting the unequal and informal nature of labour tenancy arrangements. The presumption that the plaintiff is not a...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff declared a labour tenant under Section 33(2A) of the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act 3 of 1996.

Orders

  • It is declared in terms of Section 33(2A) of the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act 3 of 1996 that the Plaintiff is a labour tenant.
  • There is no order as to costs.