Mtshali v Bencor Eiendoms (Pty) Ltd and Another (LCC39/2024) [2024] ZALCC 24 (18 July 2024)

Mtshali v Bencor Eiendoms (Pty) Ltd and Another (LCC39/2024) [2024] ZALCC 24 (18 July 2024)

The applicant does not reside on Lowlands Farm but at Roode Poort Spruyt, where he has established a permanent homestead. Therefore, he is not an occupier of Lowlands Farm under ESTA and is not entitled to protection as such. Even if he were an occupier, the right to graze livestock on another's land is a personal...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] ZALCC 24
Parties
Applicant: Nhlanhla Vincent Mtshali; Respondent: Bencor Eiendoms (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Mr Ben Bester
Court
Land Claims Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 July 2024
Case Number
LCC39/2024
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Judgment on Merits
Outcome
Application dismissed. No order as to costs.
Judges
Ncube
Legal Topics
Extension of Security of Tenure Act, Occupier Definition, Grazing Rights, Personal Rights, Consent to Graze
Land and Property Civil Procedure Extension of Security of Tenure Act Occupier Definition Grazing Rights Personal Rights Consent to Graze

Source-derived case record

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nhlanhla Vincent Mtshali

Applicant

Bencor Eiendoms (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Mr Ben Bester

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Judgment on Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is an occupier of Lowlands Farm under ESTA and entitled to protection.
  2. 2 If the applicant is an occupier, whether he has a right to keep livestock on the farm and the source of such right.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant does not reside on Lowlands Farm but at Roode Poort Spruyt, where he has established a permanent homestead. Therefore, he is not an occupier of Lowlands Farm under ESTA and is not entitled to protection as such. Even if he were an occupier, the right to graze livestock on another's land is a personal right dependent on the owner's consent, which was withdrawn and not renewed. The applicant failed to prove entitlement to the relief sought.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • Condonation for late filing of the applicant's Replying Affidavit and Heads of Argument is granted.
  • The application brought by the applicant on the Notice of Motion is dismissed.