Pan African Mineral Development Company (Pty) Ltd and Others v Aquila Steel (S Africa) (Pty) Ltd (179/2017) [2017] ZASCA 165; [2018] 1 All SA 414 (SCA); 2018 (5) SA 124 (SCA) (29 November 2017)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that ZIZA, as holder of unused old order rights, lodged its prospecting right application within the exclusivity period provided by Item 8 of Schedule II to the MPRDA. Once accepted, both the right and exclusivity endured until the application was granted or refused. The Department of Mineral Resources was precluded from accepting and processing Aquila's later application while ZIZA's application was pending. Defects in ZIZA's application did not render its acceptance a nullity, as substantial compliance and supplementation were permitted. The Minister's refusal of Aquila's mining right application was lawful, as Aquila's prospecting right had lapsed and...
- Citation
- [2017] ZASCA 165
- Parties
- Appellant: Pan African Mineral Development Company (Pty) Ltd; Appellant: ZIZA Limited; Appellant: Minister of Mineral Resources; Appellant: Director-General of the Department of Mineral Resources; Appellant: Deputy Director-General: Mineral Regulation, Department of Mineral Resources; Appellant: Regional Manager: Northern Cape Region, Department of Mineral Resources; Respondent: Aquila Steel (S Africa) (Pty) Ltd
- Court
- Supreme Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 29 November 2017
- Case Number
- 179/2017
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Division, Pretoria
- Outcome
- Appeal upheld with costs; cross appeal dismissed with costs; high court's order set aside and replaced with dismissal of the application.
- Judges
- Ponnan, Bosielo, Willis, Mathopo, Tsoka
- Legal Topics
- Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, Old Order Rights, Prospecting Rights, Administrative Review, Statutory Interpretation
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Pan African Mineral Development Company (Pty) Ltd
Appellant
ZIZA Limited
Appellant
Minister of Mineral Resources
Appellant
Director-General of the Department of Mineral Resources
Appellant
Deputy Director-General: Mineral Regulation, Department of Mineral Resources
Appellant
Regional Manager: Northern Cape Region, Department of Mineral Resources
Appellant
Aquila Steel (S Africa) (Pty) Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Division, Pretoria
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Department of Mineral Resources lawfully granted prospecting rights to two entities over the same land and minerals.
- 2 Whether the acceptance and processing of Aquila's application was precluded by ZIZA's pending application under the exclusivity period of Item 8 of Schedule II to the MPRDA.
- 3 Whether defects in ZIZA's application rendered its acceptance invalid and a nullity.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that ZIZA, as holder of unused old order rights, lodged its prospecting right application within the exclusivity period provided by Item 8 of Schedule II to the MPRDA. Once accepted, both the right and exclusivity endured until the application was granted or refused. The Department of Mineral Resources was precluded from accepting and processing Aquila's later application while ZIZA's application was pending. Defects in ZIZA's application did not render its acceptance a nullity, as substantial compliance and supplementation were permitted. The Minister's refusal of Aquila's mining right application was lawful, as Aquila's prospecting right had lapsed and...
Court Disposition
Appeal upheld with costs; cross appeal dismissed with costs; high court's order set aside and replaced with dismissal of the application.
Orders
- The appeal is upheld with costs.
- The cross appeal is dismissed with 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