Mining and Environmental Justice Community Network of South Africa and Others v Minister of Environmental Affairs and Others (50779/2017) [2018] ZAGPPHC 807; [2019] 1 All SA 491 (GP) (8 November 2018)

Mining and Environmental Justice Community Network of South Africa and Others v Minister of Environmental Affairs and Others (50779/2017) [2018] ZAGPPHC 807; [2019] 1 All SA 491 (GP) (8 November 2018)

The court found that the Ministers' decisions to permit mining in the Mabola Protected Environment were procedurally unfair and unlawful. The Ministers failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of sections 3 and 4 of PAJA, did not provide transparency or public participation, and did not properly consider all relevant information, including the interests of local communities, the final management plan, and pending statutory appeals. The Ministers' approach amounted to an impermissible reliance on other authorisations without independent scrutiny, contrary to their distinctive duties under NEMPAA. The court held that the decisions must be reviewed and set aside, and the application...

Citation
[2018] ZAGPPHC 807
Parties
Applicant: Mining and Environmental Justice Community Network of South Africa; Applicant: Groundwork; Applicant: Earthlife Africa, Johannesburg; Applicant: Birdlife South Africa; Applicant: Endangered Wildlife Trust; Applicant: Federation for a Sustainable Environment; Applicant: Association for Water and Rural Development; Applicant: Bench Marks Foundation; Respondent: Minister of Environmental Affairs; Respondent: Minister of Mineral Resources; Respondent: Atha-Africa Ventures (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Mabola Protected Environment Landowners Association; Respondent: MEC for Agriculture, Rural Development, Land and Environmental Affairs, Mpumalanga
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 November 2018
Case Number
50779/2017
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment After Opposed Motion and Dismissal of Postponement
Outcome
Application granted. The Ministers' decisions to permit mining in the Mabola Protected Environment are reviewed and set aside. The matter is remitted for reconsideration with specific directives.
Judges
N Davis
Legal Topics
Protected Areas Management, Ministerial Discretion, Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Public Participation, Mining Authorisation, Constitutional Environmental Rights
Environmental Law Administrative Law Protected Areas Management Ministerial Discretion Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Public Participation Mining Authorisation Constitutional Environmental Rights

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 27 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mining and Environmental Justice Community Network of South Africa

Applicant

Groundwork

Applicant

Earthlife Africa, Johannesburg

Applicant

Birdlife South Africa

Applicant

Endangered Wildlife Trust

Applicant

Federation for a Sustainable Environment

Applicant

Association for Water and Rural Development

Applicant

Bench Marks Foundation

Applicant

Minister of Environmental Affairs

Respondent

Minister of Mineral Resources

Respondent

Atha-Africa Ventures (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Mabola Protected Environment Landowners Association

Respondent

MEC for Agriculture, Rural Development, Land and Environmental Affairs, Mpumalanga

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment After Opposed Motion and Dismissal of Postponement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Ministers' decisions to permit mining in the Mabola Protected Environment were procedurally fair and lawful.
  2. 2 Whether the Ministers complied with sections 3 and 4 of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA).
  3. 3 Whether the Ministers properly exercised their distinctive duties under section 48 of the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act (NEMPAA).

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Ministers' decisions to permit mining in the Mabola Protected Environment were procedurally unfair and unlawful. The Ministers failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of sections 3 and 4 of PAJA, did not provide transparency or public participation, and did not properly consider all relevant information, including the interests of local communities, the final management plan, and pending statutory appeals. The Ministers' approach amounted to an impermissible reliance on other authorisations without independent scrutiny, contrary to their distinctive duties under NEMPAA. The court held that the decisions must be reviewed and set aside, and the application...

Court Disposition

Application granted. The Ministers' decisions to permit mining in the Mabola Protected Environment are reviewed and set aside. The matter is remitted for reconsideration with specific directives.

Orders

  • The decisions of the First and Second Respondents to grant written permission for commercial mining in the Mabola Protected Environment are reviewed and set aside.
  • The Third Respondent's application for written permission to conduct commercial mining in the Mabola Protected Environment is remitted to the First and Second Respondents for reconsideration.