Umfolozi Sugar Planters Limited and Others v Isimangaliso Wetland Park Authority and Others (873/2017) [2018] ZASCA 144 (1 October 2018)

Umfolozi Sugar Planters Limited and Others v Isimangaliso Wetland Park Authority and Others (873/2017) [2018] ZASCA 144 (1 October 2018)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the relief sought by the appellants had been rendered moot by the approval and publication of the Integrated Management Plan (IMP), which included the Estuarine Management Plan (EMP) for the St Lucia Estuary. The court found that the declaratory relief sought was indeterminate, vague, and not properly pleaded, and that it was not appropriate to grant a declarator in the absence of a live dispute or a challenge to the IMP or EMP. The interim order was dependent on the declaratory relief and could not survive its failure. The appellants had not established any legal basis for the relief sought, and the costs of the contempt applications were not...

Citation
[2018] ZASCA 144
Parties
Appellant: Umfolozi Sugar Planters Limited; Appellant: Paul Van Rooyen; Appellant: Petros Maphumulo; Respondent: Isimangaliso Wetland Park Authority; Respondent: Minister of Water and Sanitation; Respondent: Minister of Environmental Affairs; Respondent: Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries; Respondent: Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 October 2018
Case Number
873/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Kwa Zulu Natal Division of the High Court, Durban
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including those of two counsel where so employed.
Judges
Ponnan, Mbha, Dambuza, Makgoka, Mokgohloa
Legal Topics
Estuarine Management, Declaratory Relief, Mootness, Interim Interdict, Protected Areas Management
Environmental Law Administrative Law Estuarine Management Declaratory Relief Mootness Interim Interdict Protected Areas Management

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 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Umfolozi Sugar Planters Limited

Appellant

Paul Van Rooyen

Appellant

Petros Maphumulo

Appellant

Isimangaliso Wetland Park Authority

Respondent

Minister of Water and Sanitation

Respondent

Minister of Environmental Affairs

Respondent

Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

Respondent

Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Kwa Zulu Natal Division of the High Court, Durban

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the relief sought by the appellants remains justiciable after the publication of the Integrated Management Plan (IMP).
  2. 2 Whether the appellants are entitled to a declaratory order directing the respondent to prevent and drain down back flooding on their farmland.
  3. 3 Whether the interim order of 15 October 2015 should remain operative.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the relief sought by the appellants had been rendered moot by the approval and publication of the Integrated Management Plan (IMP), which included the Estuarine Management Plan (EMP) for the St Lucia Estuary. The court found that the declaratory relief sought was indeterminate, vague, and not properly pleaded, and that it was not appropriate to grant a declarator in the absence of a live dispute or a challenge to the IMP or EMP. The interim order was dependent on the declaratory relief and could not survive its failure. The appellants had not established any legal basis for the relief sought, and the costs of the contempt applications were not...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including those of two counsel where so employed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, including those of two counsel where so employed.