Topigs Norsvin SA Proprietary Limited v Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd and Others (013715/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 848 (28 August 2024)

Topigs Norsvin SA Proprietary Limited v Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd and Others (013715/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 848 (28 August 2024)

The court found that NERSA is an organ of state established under section 3 of the National Energy Regulator Act, with a mandate focused on licensing and compliance with licence conditions for electricity generation and transmission. There is no statutory provision empowering NERSA to enforce environmental compliance or to compel Eskom to desist from pollution at Kusile Power Station. The applicant failed to demonstrate that NERSA has a duty to protect against environmental degradation downstream of the power station. The omission to make a finding against NERSA in the main judgment was a patent error, which the court corrected under Rule 42. Accordingly, the application against NERSA was...

Citation
[2024] ZAGPPHC 848
Parties
Applicant: Topigs Norsvin SA Proprietary Limited; Respondent: Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd; Respondent: Andre Marinus de Ruyter; Respondent: Calib Cassim; Respondent: Malegapuru William Makgoba; Respondent: Banothile Charity Makhubela; Respondent: Pulane Elsie Molokwane; Respondent: Busisiwe Mavuso; Respondent: Roderick de Brassic Crompton; Respondent: Tshepo Herbert Tong-Mongalo; Respondent: Mlawuli Mayor Majingolo; Respondent: Deidre Herbst; Respondent: Bongumusa Mashazi; Respondent: Lesiba Kgobe; Respondent: Minister of Water and Sanitation; Respondent: Director-General: Department of Water and Sanitation; Respondent: Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment; Respondent: Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment; Respondent: National Energy Regulator of South Africa; Respondent: Clive Raymond Le Roux; Respondent: Paul Mpho Makwana; Respondent: Austin Leslie Mkhabela; Respondent: Busisiwe Vilakazi; Respondent: Lwazi Leon Goqwana; Respondent: Fathima Bee Bee Abdul Gany; Respondent: Anyanda Pearl Zinhle Mafuleka; Respondent: Tskani Lotten Mthombeni; Respondent: Beki Zacharia Ntshalintshali; Respondent: Nteto Nyathi; Respondent: Tryphosa Ramano; Respondent: Clauselle von Eck
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 August 2024
Case Number
013715/2022
Procedural Posture
Rule 42 Application / Application for Correction of Judgment Under Rule 42
Outcome
The application against NERSA, the nineteenth respondent, is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Judges
ML Twala
Legal Topics
National Energy Regulator Act, Electricity Regulator Act, Judicial Error Correction, Environmental Compliance, Licensing Authority Scope
Administrative Law Environmental Law National Energy Regulator Act Electricity Regulator Act Judicial Error Correction Environmental Compliance Licensing Authority Scope

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Topigs Norsvin SA Proprietary Limited

Applicant

Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd

Respondent

Andre Marinus de Ruyter

Respondent

Calib Cassim

Respondent

Malegapuru William Makgoba

Respondent

Banothile Charity Makhubela

Respondent

Pulane Elsie Molokwane

Respondent

Busisiwe Mavuso

Respondent

Roderick de Brassic Crompton

Respondent

Tshepo Herbert Tong-Mongalo

Respondent

Mlawuli Mayor Majingolo

Respondent

Deidre Herbst

Respondent

Bongumusa Mashazi

Respondent

Lesiba Kgobe

Respondent

Minister of Water and Sanitation

Respondent

Director-General: Department of Water and Sanitation

Respondent

Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

Respondent

Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment

Respondent

National Energy Regulator of South Africa

Respondent

Clive Raymond Le Roux

Respondent

Paul Mpho Makwana

Respondent

Austin Leslie Mkhabela

Respondent

Busisiwe Vilakazi

Respondent

Lwazi Leon Goqwana

Respondent

Fathima Bee Bee Abdul Gany

Respondent

Anyanda Pearl Zinhle Mafuleka

Respondent

Tskani Lotten Mthombeni

Respondent

Beki Zacharia Ntshalintshali

Respondent

Nteto Nyathi

Respondent

Tryphosa Ramano

Respondent

Clauselle von Eck

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Rule 42 Application / Application for Correction of Judgment Under Rule 42

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA) has the statutory power or duty to enforce environmental compliance at Kusile Power Station.
  2. 2 Whether the omission to make a finding against NERSA in the main judgment constitutes a patent error requiring correction under Rule 42.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant demonstrated a legal basis for relief against NERSA.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that NERSA is an organ of state established under section 3 of the National Energy Regulator Act, with a mandate focused on licensing and compliance with licence conditions for electricity generation and transmission. There is no statutory provision empowering NERSA to enforce environmental compliance or to compel Eskom to desist from pollution at Kusile Power Station. The applicant failed to demonstrate that NERSA has a duty to protect against environmental degradation downstream of the power station. The omission to make a finding against NERSA in the main judgment was a patent error, which the court corrected under Rule 42. Accordingly, the application against NERSA was...

Court Disposition

The application against NERSA, the nineteenth respondent, is dismissed with no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The application against NERSA, the nineteenth respondent, is dismissed with no order as to costs.