Rustenburg Platium Mines Limited v Lesojane (UM44/2022) [2022] ZANWHC 36 (21 June 2022)

Rustenburg Platium Mines Limited v Lesojane (UM44/2022) [2022] ZANWHC 36 (21 June 2022)

The applicant proved service of the 10 March 2022 order and non-compliance by the respondent, who continued to invade the property and incite others despite being aware of the order. The respondent failed to oppose the application or provide any evidence to rebut wilfulness or mala fides. The court found the respondent's conduct to be a flagrant and aggravated disregard for judicial authority, including threats of violence against the applicant's agents. The requirements for contempt were met beyond reasonable doubt, and direct imprisonment was warranted as sanction, though for a reduced term of thirty days.

Citation
[2022] ZANWHC 36
Parties
Applicant: Rustenburg Platinum Mines Limited; Respondent: Manoko Daniel Lesojane
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 June 2022
Case Number
UM44/2022
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Contempt Application Following Breach of Interim Interdict
Outcome
The respondent is found guilty of contempt of the court order of 10 March 2022 and sentenced to thirty days' imprisonment.
Judges
A H Petersen
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Interim Interdict, Service of Process, Land Invasion, Urgent Relief
Civil Procedure Land and Property Contempt of Court Interim Interdict Service of Process Land Invasion Urgent Relief

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rustenburg Platinum Mines Limited

Applicant

Manoko Daniel Lesojane

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Contempt Application Following Breach of Interim Interdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent is in contempt of the court order granted on 10 March 2022.
  2. 2 Whether service and notice of the order were properly effected on the respondent.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's conduct was wilful and mala fide in breaching the order.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant proved service of the 10 March 2022 order and non-compliance by the respondent, who continued to invade the property and incite others despite being aware of the order. The respondent failed to oppose the application or provide any evidence to rebut wilfulness or mala fides. The court found the respondent's conduct to be a flagrant and aggravated disregard for judicial authority, including threats of violence against the applicant's agents. The requirements for contempt were met beyond reasonable doubt, and direct imprisonment was warranted as sanction, though for a reduced term of thirty days.

Court Disposition

The respondent is found guilty of contempt of the court order of 10 March 2022 and sentenced to thirty days' imprisonment.

Orders

  • The respondent is found guilty of being in contempt of the Court Order of 10 March 2022.
  • The respondent is sentenced to thirty (30) days' imprisonment.