Ndlela and Others v Nel and Others (LCC 18/2002) [2014] ZALCC 4 (28 February 2014)

Ndlela and Others v Nel and Others (LCC 18/2002) [2014] ZALCC 4 (28 February 2014)

The applicants and the second and third respondents repeatedly failed to comply with multiple court orders, engaged in manifestly inappropriate conduct including bringing abortive review proceedings, and obstructed the finalisation of the matter. Their actions went beyond the bounds of legitimate constitutional litigation and amounted to an abuse of process. The second and third respondents, as organs of state, failed in their statutory duties to facilitate the implementation of the court's orders and contributed to unnecessary delays. In light of these special circumstances, the general rule against costs orders in public interest litigation does not apply. A costs order is justified to...

Citation
[2014] ZALCC 4
Parties
Applicant: MM Ndlela and Others; Respondent: LJ Nel; Respondent: Minister of Land Affairs; Respondent: Director General of Land Affairs
Court
Land Claims Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 February 2014
Case Number
LCC 18/2002
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Costs Determination Following Settlement of Substantive Dispute
Outcome
Costs order granted against the applicants and the second and third respondents, jointly and severally, taxed as between party and party, with specific protection for the applicants' cattle.
Judges
Canca, E Bertelsmann
Legal Topics
Labour Tenancy, Costs Award, Public Interest Litigation, Court Orders Enforcement, Constitutional Rights, Abuse of Process
Land and Property Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Labour Tenancy Costs Award Public Interest Litigation Court Orders Enforcement Constitutional Rights +1 more

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MM Ndlela and Others

Applicant

LJ Nel

Respondent

Minister of Land Affairs

Respondent

Director General of Land Affairs

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Costs Determination Following Settlement of Substantive Dispute

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a costs order is justified against the applicants and the second and third respondents in light of their conduct and the nature of the litigation.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants' cattle may be attached to satisfy the costs order.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants and the second and third respondents repeatedly failed to comply with multiple court orders, engaged in manifestly inappropriate conduct including bringing abortive review proceedings, and obstructed the finalisation of the matter. Their actions went beyond the bounds of legitimate constitutional litigation and amounted to an abuse of process. The second and third respondents, as organs of state, failed in their statutory duties to facilitate the implementation of the court's orders and contributed to unnecessary delays. In light of these special circumstances, the general rule against costs orders in public interest litigation does not apply. A costs order is justified to...

Court Disposition

Costs order granted against the applicants and the second and third respondents, jointly and severally, taxed as between party and party, with specific protection for the applicants' cattle.

Orders

  • The applicants and the second and third respondents are ordered to pay the costs of this application and the application of 14 April 2008, jointly and severally, taxed as between party and party, the one paying, the other to be absolved.
  • It is specifically declared that the applicants' cattle may not be attached to satisfy this order by way of execution.