Simpson v Ntsele and Another (LCC38/03) [2007] ZALCC 21 (11 October 2007)

Simpson v Ntsele and Another (LCC38/03) [2007] ZALCC 21 (11 October 2007)

The court issued an order based on a negotiated settlement between the Applicant, the First Respondent, and the Second Respondent. The First Respondent and his household are required to vacate the farm by 11 January 2008, with the Applicant contributing R 15,000.00 towards relocation costs. The Second Respondent is to assist the First Respondent in acquiring alternative land and provide necessary financial support. The Applicant and First Respondent are to refrain from interfering with each other until the relocation date. Maureen Ntsele is not subject to eviction and retains limited rights to remain on the farm with a family member and up to six cattle. The Applicant may apply for an...

Citation
[2007] ZALCC 21
Parties
Applicant: Carl Lionel Millin Simpson; Respondent: Thulani Ndlela Zimhlophe David Ntsele; Respondent: Director General of Land Affairs
Court
Land Claims Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 October 2007
Case Number
LCC38/03
Procedural Posture
Order / Settlement and Final Order
Outcome
Order granted in terms of the settlement agreement; First Respondent and household to vacate the farm by 11 January 2008, with relocation costs paid and alternative land assistance provided.
Judges
Gildenhuys
Legal Topics
Eviction, Labour Tenant Rights, Land Reform Program, Relocation Costs
Land and Property Civil Procedure Eviction Labour Tenant Rights Land Reform Program Relocation Costs

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Carl Lionel Millin Simpson

Applicant

Thulani Ndlela Zimhlophe David Ntsele

Respondent

Director General of Land Affairs

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Order / Settlement and Final Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the First Respondent and his household must vacate the farm by the specified relocation date.
  2. 2 Whether the First Respondent qualifies for assistance as a labour tenant under the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act.
  3. 3 What obligations exist regarding relocation costs and alternative land acquisition.

Ratio Decidendi

The court issued an order based on a negotiated settlement between the Applicant, the First Respondent, and the Second Respondent. The First Respondent and his household are required to vacate the farm by 11 January 2008, with the Applicant contributing R 15,000.00 towards relocation costs. The Second Respondent is to assist the First Respondent in acquiring alternative land and provide necessary financial support. The Applicant and First Respondent are to refrain from interfering with each other until the relocation date. Maureen Ntsele is not subject to eviction and retains limited rights to remain on the farm with a family member and up to six cattle. The Applicant may apply for an...

Court Disposition

Order granted in terms of the settlement agreement; First Respondent and household to vacate the farm by 11 January 2008, with relocation costs paid and alternative land assistance provided.

Orders

  • The First Respondent and his household must vacate the farm by 11 January 2008, taking all loose assets and livestock.
  • The Second Respondent must assist the First Respondent to find and acquire alternative land and provide necessary financial support.