Nzimande and Others v Director General of the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform and Others (LCC41/2011) [2022] ZALCC 47 (8 July 2022)

Nzimande and Others v Director General of the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform and Others (LCC41/2011) [2022] ZALCC 47 (8 July 2022)

The court found that the applicants failed to bring their review application within a reasonable time and did not provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay. The applicants' interest in the land was through shareholding in a company that was liquidated, and they did not oppose the liquidation or take steps to protect their interest. The consultative process was properly followed, and the applicants did not object to the fifth respondent's claim when given the opportunity. The principle of legality does not dispense with the requirement of reasonable promptness in review proceedings. The court was not persuaded that another court would reach a different conclusion, and leave to...

Citation
[2022] ZALCC 47
Parties
Appellant: Elton Nzimande and 129 Others; Respondent: Director General of the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform; Respondent: Ms Nelisiwe Sithole, Head of the Department, Mpumalanga Provincial Department of Agriculture, Rural Development and Land Administration; Respondent: Acting Chief Land Claims Commissioner; Respondent: Acting Regional Land Claims Commissioner, Province of Mpumalanga; Respondent: Matsamo Communal Property Association
Court
Land Claims Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 July 2022
Case Number
LCC41/2011
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal Following Dismissal of Review Application
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
MIA
Legal Topics
Restitution of Land Rights, Delay in Review Applications, Principle of Legality, Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Consultation Requirements, Functus Officio
Land and Property Administrative Law Civil Procedure Restitution of Land Rights Delay in Review Applications Principle of Legality Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Consultation Requirements +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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elton Nzimande and 129 Others

Appellant

Director General of the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform

Respondent

Ms Nelisiwe Sithole, Head of the Department, Mpumalanga Provincial Department of Agriculture, Rural Development and Land Administration

Respondent

Acting Chief Land Claims Commissioner

Respondent

Acting Regional Land Claims Commissioner, Province of Mpumalanga

Respondent

Matsamo Communal Property Association

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal Following Dismissal of Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court erred in finding there was no reviewable decision regarding the acquisition and restoration of land.
  2. 2 Whether the principle of legality, rather than PAJA, governs the review application.
  3. 3 Whether the delay in launching the review application should bar adjudication on the merits.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to bring their review application within a reasonable time and did not provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay. The applicants' interest in the land was through shareholding in a company that was liquidated, and they did not oppose the liquidation or take steps to protect their interest. The consultative process was properly followed, and the applicants did not object to the fifth respondent's claim when given the opportunity. The principle of legality does not dispense with the requirement of reasonable promptness in review proceedings. The court was not persuaded that another court would reach a different conclusion, and leave to...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal is dismissed with costs.