Normandien Farms (Pty) Ltd v Mathimbane and Others (LCC196/2013) [2016] ZALCC 30 (16 February 2016)
The court found that the issues raised in both applications for leave to appeal had already been addressed with reasoned findings in the original judgment. Upon careful consideration of the submissions by counsel for both sides, the court concluded that there were no reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion on the matters raised. The alleged conflict between the orders was dismissed, as the orders pertained to separate matters, despite both accepting the labour tenancy status of the First to Twelfth Respondents. The interpretation of the relevant statutes and the findings on costs and locus standi were upheld. Consequently, both applications for leave to...
- Citation
- [2016] ZALCC 30
- Parties
- Applicant: Normandien Farms (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Mandla Nkosi Joseph Mathimbane; Respondent: Bonginkosi David Mathimbane; Respondent: Phumelelo Florence Mathimbane; Respondent: Mlamuli Obed Mathimbane; Respondent: Sipho Mathimbane; Respondent: Mariam Jele; Respondent: Bernard Jele; Respondent: Martha Jele; Respondent: Albert Jele; Respondent: Apostol Jele; Respondent: Sweet Better Jele; Respondent: Johannes Jele; Respondent: Minister of the National Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries; Respondent: Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform; Respondent: Regional Land Claims Commissioner, KwaZulu-Natal
- Court
- Land Claims Court
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 16 February 2016
- Case Number
- LCC196/2013
- Procedural Posture
- Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Order
- Outcome
- Both applications for leave to appeal are dismissed. No order as to costs.
- Judges
- Meer Y S
- Legal Topics
- Labour Tenancy Status, Leave to Appeal, Interpretation of Statutes, Costs Award
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Normandien Farms (Pty) Ltd
Applicant
Mandla Nkosi Joseph Mathimbane
Respondent
Bonginkosi David Mathimbane
Respondent
Phumelelo Florence Mathimbane
Respondent
Mlamuli Obed Mathimbane
Respondent
Sipho Mathimbane
Respondent
Mariam Jele
Respondent
Bernard Jele
Respondent
Martha Jele
Respondent
Albert Jele
Respondent
Apostol Jele
Respondent
Sweet Better Jele
Respondent
Johannes Jele
Respondent
Minister of the National Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
Respondent
Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform
Respondent
Regional Land Claims Commissioner, KwaZulu-Natal
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there are reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the judgment and order of 5 November 2015.
- 2 Whether the orders of this court conflict with previous orders regarding labour tenancy status.
- 3 Whether the interpretation of the Land Reform Labour Tenants Act and related statutes was correct.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the issues raised in both applications for leave to appeal had already been addressed with reasoned findings in the original judgment. Upon careful consideration of the submissions by counsel for both sides, the court concluded that there were no reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion on the matters raised. The alleged conflict between the orders was dismissed, as the orders pertained to separate matters, despite both accepting the labour tenancy status of the First to Twelfth Respondents. The interpretation of the relevant statutes and the findings on costs and locus standi were upheld. Consequently, both applications for leave to...
Court Disposition
Both applications for leave to appeal are dismissed. No order as to costs.
Orders
- The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.
- There is no order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment