Sole NO and Another v Minister of the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries and Others (356/13) [2013] ZAWCHC 94 (13 June 2013)

Sole NO and Another v Minister of the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries and Others (356/13) [2013] ZAWCHC 94 (13 June 2013)

The applicant failed to establish that her constitutional right to environmental protection, or that of the public, was infringed by the respondents. The evidence demonstrated that the West Coast Rock Lobster fishery is managed within a sound scientific framework, with sustainability as a foundational objective and ongoing expert oversight. The applicant did not provide credible scientific authority for the claimed international benchmark or for the necessity of immediate suspension of fishing. Furthermore, she did not exhaust alternative remedies available under the Marine Living Resources Act and the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act. The drastic remedy of a final interdict was...

Citation
[2013] ZAWCHC 94
Parties
Applicant: Judith Anne Sole N.O.; Respondent: Minister of the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries; Respondent: Deputy Director-General of the Fisheries Branch: Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries; Respondent: Finance; Respondent: Social Development; Respondent: The parties listed in Annexures “A” and “B” to the order dated 21 February 2013
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 June 2013
Case Number
356/13
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Interdict Application
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Judges
P B Fourie
Legal Topics
Marine Living Resources Act, Environmental Rights, Final Interdict, Total Allowable Catch, Public Interest Litigation
Environmental Law Constitutional Law Marine Living Resources Act Environmental Rights Final Interdict Total Allowable Catch Public Interest Litigation

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Judith Anne Sole N.O.

Applicant

Minister of the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

Respondent

Deputy Director-General of the Fisheries Branch: Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

Respondent

Finance

Respondent

Social Development

Respondent

The parties listed in Annexures “A” and “B” to the order dated 21 February 2013

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Final Interdict Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a final interdict suspending all commercial fishing activities in the West Coast Rock Lobster fishery.
  2. 2 Whether the respondents have infringed the applicant's constitutional right to environmental protection under section 24 of the Constitution.
  3. 3 Whether there are no other satisfactory remedies available to the applicant.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to establish that her constitutional right to environmental protection, or that of the public, was infringed by the respondents. The evidence demonstrated that the West Coast Rock Lobster fishery is managed within a sound scientific framework, with sustainability as a foundational objective and ongoing expert oversight. The applicant did not provide credible scientific authority for the claimed international benchmark or for the necessity of immediate suspension of fishing. Furthermore, she did not exhaust alternative remedies available under the Marine Living Resources Act and the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act. The drastic remedy of a final interdict was...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of suit of the non-governmental respondents who opposed the application.