Tshakuma Community Trust and Another v Regional Land Claims Commissioner for the Province of Limpopo and Others (LCC194/2013) [2023] ZALCC 21 (11 July 2023)
The court found that the RLCC committed a gross irregularity by investigating and approving a land claim that had already been merged and settled by agreement between the Tshakuma and Dombo Communities. Once the claims were merged and a trust established, the Dombo Community's claim ceased to exist as a separate dispute. The RLCC's subsequent acceptance and publication of the Dombo claim was irrational and contrary to the Restitution of Land Rights Act and constitutional principles of lawful administrative action. The settlement agreement remained binding and had not been set aside. The RLCC could not revive a dispute that had been resolved, and the same land could not be restored twice...
- Citation
- [2023] ZALCC 21
- Parties
- Applicant: Tshakuma Community Trust; Applicant: Mukandanglawo Wilbert Madzivhandila N.O.; Respondent: Regional Land Claims Commissioner for the Province of Limpopo; Respondent: Chief Land Claims Commissioner; Respondent: Minister of the Department of Rural Development & Land Reform; Respondent: The Dombo Community; Respondent: Martin John Dombo N.O.; Respondent: Ratshilumela John Dombo N.O.
- Court
- Land Claims Court
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 11 July 2023
- Case Number
- LCC194/2013
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Judgment
- Outcome
- Application for review granted; RLCC's decisions to accept, approve, and publish the Dombo Community claim set aside.
- Judges
- Ncube
- Legal Topics
- Restitution of Land Rights Act, Review of Administrative Action, Settlement Agreement, Gazetting of Land Claim, Merger of Land Claims
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Tshakuma Community Trust
Applicant
Mukandanglawo Wilbert Madzivhandila N.O.
Applicant
Regional Land Claims Commissioner for the Province of Limpopo
Respondent
Chief Land Claims Commissioner
Respondent
Minister of the Department of Rural Development & Land Reform
Respondent
The Dombo Community
Respondent
Martin John Dombo N.O.
Respondent
Ratshilumela John Dombo N.O.
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Regional Land Claims Commissioner's decision to accept and approve the Dombo Community land claim after a prior merger agreement is reviewable.
- 2 Whether the decision was valid, rational, and in accordance with statutory and constitutional prescripts.
- 3 What is the legal status and effect of the settlement agreement merging the Dombo and Tshakuma Community claims.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the RLCC committed a gross irregularity by investigating and approving a land claim that had already been merged and settled by agreement between the Tshakuma and Dombo Communities. Once the claims were merged and a trust established, the Dombo Community's claim ceased to exist as a separate dispute. The RLCC's subsequent acceptance and publication of the Dombo claim was irrational and contrary to the Restitution of Land Rights Act and constitutional principles of lawful administrative action. The settlement agreement remained binding and had not been set aside. The RLCC could not revive a dispute that had been resolved, and the same land could not be restored twice...
Court Disposition
Application for review granted; RLCC's decisions to accept, approve, and publish the Dombo Community claim set aside.
Orders
- The decision of the Regional Land Claims Commissioner, Limpopo to accept and approve the recommendation of Miss Ratitshanga, contained in her report dated 14 September 2012 is reviewed and set aside.
- The decision of the Regional Land Claims Commissioner, Limpopo to cause publication of the Dombo Community Claim in Notice No 899 of 2012, contained in Government Gazette No 35831 of 2 November 2012 is reviewed and set aside.
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