Ntamo and Others v Premier of the Eastern Cape and Others (415/2016) [2019] ZAECBHC 23 (15 November 2019)
The court found that the process by which the fifth respondent was elected and recognised as iNkosana of the Cala Reserve community was unlawful, as it contravened both the prior court order and the applicable customary law. The Royal family was required to identify the sixth applicant, who had been validly elected by the community in 2013, and the MEC was obliged to exercise discretion under section 18(5) of the Governance Act to ensure compliance with customary law. The Royal family decision was not administrative action subject to review under PAJA, and the failure to join the Royal family as a party was not fatal, as it had substantively participated and waived any right to formal...
- Citation
- [2019] ZAECBHC 23
- Parties
- Applicant: Penrose Ntamo; Applicant: Novuso Nopote; Applicant: Gagile Cuba; Applicant: Zoyisile Tyandela; Applicant: The Local Planning Committee, Cala Reserve; Applicant: Gideon Sitwayi; Respondent: Premier of the Eastern Cape; Respondent: Chief Gecelo; Respondent: Gcina Traditional Council; Respondent: MEC for Local Government and Traditional Affairs; Respondent: Ndodenkulu Jackson Yolelo; Respondent: Eastern Cape House of Traditional Leaders
- Court
- Eastern Cape High Court, Bhisho
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 15 November 2019
- Case Number
- 415/2016
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Judgment
- Outcome
- Application granted; the election and recognition of the fifth respondent as iNkosana are set aside, and the sixth applicant is recognised as iNkosana.
- Judges
- S.K. Gough
- Legal Topics
- Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Customary Law Headmanship, Joinder of Parties, Substitution of Administrative Decision, Res Judicata
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Penrose Ntamo
Applicant
Novuso Nopote
Applicant
Gagile Cuba
Applicant
Zoyisile Tyandela
Applicant
The Local Planning Committee, Cala Reserve
Applicant
Gideon Sitwayi
Applicant
Premier of the Eastern Cape
Respondent
Chief Gecelo
Respondent
Gcina Traditional Council
Respondent
MEC for Local Government and Traditional Affairs
Respondent
Ndodenkulu Jackson Yolelo
Respondent
Eastern Cape House of Traditional Leaders
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the identification of the fifth respondent as iNkosana by the Royal family and subsequent recognition by the MEC complied with customary law and the court order.
- 2 Whether the Royal family decision constituted administrative action subject to judicial review under PAJA.
- 3 Whether the failure to join the Royal family as a party was fatal to the application.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the process by which the fifth respondent was elected and recognised as iNkosana of the Cala Reserve community was unlawful, as it contravened both the prior court order and the applicable customary law. The Royal family was required to identify the sixth applicant, who had been validly elected by the community in 2013, and the MEC was obliged to exercise discretion under section 18(5) of the Governance Act to ensure compliance with customary law. The Royal family decision was not administrative action subject to review under PAJA, and the failure to join the Royal family as a party was not fatal, as it had substantively participated and waived any right to formal...
Court Disposition
Application granted; the election and recognition of the fifth respondent as iNkosana are set aside, and the sixth applicant is recognised as iNkosana.
Orders
- The third respondent’s preliminary point on non-joinder of the ama-Gcina Royal family is dismissed.
- The election on 14 October 2015 of the fifth respondent (Mr ND Yolelo) as iNkosana of the Cala Reserve community is declared unlawful and set aside.
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