SA Heritage Resources Agency and Others v Mandela and Others (15867/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 278 (20 March 2024)

SA Heritage Resources Agency and Others v Mandela and Others (15867/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 278 (20 March 2024)

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed because it fails to meet the requirements set out in the Superior Courts Act. The applicants have not established a clear right to the final interdict sought, as their pleadings do not set out sufficient facts to support the relief. The Mandela Objects do not clearly...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] ZAGPPHC 278
Parties
Applicant: SA Heritage Resources Agency; Applicant: Robben Island Museum; Applicant: Dept of Sports, Arts & Culture; Respondent: Dr Makaziwe Mandela; Respondent: Guernsey’s Auction House; Respondent: Arlan Ettinger; Respondent: Christo Brand; Respondent: David Parr
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 March 2024
Case Number
15867/2022
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Main Judgment
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Baqwa, Ngalwana, Ramawele
Legal Topics
National Heritage Resources Act, Heritage Object Declaration, Final Interdict Requirements, Interpretation of Statutes
Land and Property Administrative Law National Heritage Resources Act Heritage Object Declaration Final Interdict Requirements Interpretation of Statutes

Source-derived case record

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 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SA Heritage Resources Agency

Applicant

Robben Island Museum

Applicant

Dept of Sports, Arts & Culture

Applicant

Dr Makaziwe Mandela

Respondent

Guernsey’s Auction House

Respondent

Arlan Ettinger

Respondent

Christo Brand

Respondent

David Parr

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Main Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for leave to appeal meets the statutory requirements under the Superior Courts Act.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants established a clear right to the final interdict sought.
  3. 3 Whether the Mandela Objects qualify as heritage objects under the National Heritage Resources Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed because it fails to meet the requirements set out in the Superior Courts Act. The applicants have not established a clear right to the final interdict sought, as their pleadings do not set out sufficient facts to support the relief. The Mandela Objects do not clearly qualify as heritage objects under the National Heritage Resources Act, and the applicants' broad interpretation would lead to absurd results. The factual disputes regarding the nature of the objects were not adequately addressed. The applicants attempt to advance a new case on appeal that was not pleaded in the main application. Foreign law and international instruments cannot...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • The applicants are, jointly and severally, to pay the costs of the first and fourth respondents, including the costs consequent upon the employment of two counsel in each instance.