South Africa Case Law

Sekgopo v Premier of Limpopo Province and Others (5799/2018 ; 2950/2024)

Sekgopo v Premier of Limpopo Province and Others (5799/2018 ; 2950/2024) [2025] ZALMPPHC 9 (21 January 2025)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

5799/2018 ; 2950/2024

Judge

Naude–Odendaal

The court found that the Premier's decision not to approve the Kgatla Commission's recommendation was irrational, arbitrary, and not connected to the evidence or relevant customary law. The Premier failed to consider the findings of specialist bodies and previous administrative decisions. However, the court held that it was not in a position to substitute its own decision for that of the Premier regarding the recognition of William as Senior Traditional Leader, as the identification of the rightful heir requires determination by the Royal Family in accordance with customary law, and there is…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Customary Succession
• Traditional Leadership Disputes
• Condonation For Late Review
• Role Of Royal Family
• Judicial Remittal

Prince Mbonisi Bekithemba Ka Bhekuzulu and Others v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others (19891/2022; 38670/2022)

Prince Mbonisi Bekithemba Ka Bhekuzulu and Others v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others (19891/2022; 38670/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 42 (25 January 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

19891/2022; 38670/2022

Judge

N Davis

The High Court granted leave to appeal and cross-appeal over a Zulu kingship dispute, sending the matter to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

• Traditional Leadership Act
• Customary Succession
• Review Of Executive Action
• Res Judicata
• Superior Courts Act
• Costs Orders

Tauetsile v Premier of the North West Province and Others (M 123/2017)

Tauetsile v Premier of the North West Province and Others (M 123/2017) [2023] ZANWHC 7 (7 February 2023)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

M 123/2017

Judge

Petersen

The court found that the applicant failed to discharge the burden of proof that his family inherited the bogosana of Mothanthanyaneng and Graspan Metsana villages in the 1950s. The evidence presented by the applicant and his witnesses was internally contradictory and mutually destructive, particularly regarding the timing and circumstances of the alleged inheritance and the role of Kgosi Moshosho Motlhabane, who had passed away before the relevant period. The court held that section 20 of the North West Traditional Leadership and Governance Act applies only to the removal of a kgosana, not an…

Source excerpt

• Customary Succession
• Traditional Leadership Removal
• North West Traditional Leadership And Governance Act
• Burden Of Proof
• Hearsay Evidence In Customary Law

Mditshwa and Others v Sabona and Others (634/2016)

Mditshwa and Others v Sabona and Others (634/2016) [2020] ZAECMHC 15 (3 March 2020)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

634/2016

Judge

Majiki

The High Court held that the Mtweni Royal Family was the legitimate royal family and dismissed the application with costs.

• Traditional Leadership And Governance Act
• Customary Succession
• Legitimacy Of Royal Family
• Review Of Administrative Decision
• Costs Order
• Customary-succession

Yende and Another v Premier Mphumalanga Province and Others (80576/2014, A602/2017)

Yende and Another v Premier Mphumalanga Province and Others (80576/2014, A602/2017) [2019] ZAGPPHC 237 (26 June 2019)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

80576/2014, A602/2017

Judges

Strijdom, Molopa-Sethosa, Potterill

The appeal was upheld because the Commission failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of section 11 of the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act. The Royal family, as defined by statute, was not properly consulted or represented in the identification of the Senior Traditional Leader. The absence of Felani and his sisters from the proceedings constituted a material irregularity, and the process was procedurally unfair, violating the audi alteram partem rule and sections 6(2)(b) and 6(2)(c) of PAJA. Furthermore, the Commission applied incorrect succession criteria by recog…

Source excerpt

• Customary Succession
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Traditional Leadership Disputes
• Procedural Fairness
• Primogeniture
• Recognition Of Traditional Leader

Shilubana and Others v Nwamitwa (011/05)

Shilubana and Others v Nwamitwa (011/05) [2006] ZASCA 146; 2007 (2) SA 432 (SCA) (1 December 2006)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

011/05

Judges

Farlam, Mthiyane, Nugent, Mlambo, Maya

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the first appellant’s appointment as Hosi was an ad hoc departure from custom, not a valid customary succession.

• Customary Succession
• Gender Equality
• Chieftainship
• Bill Of Rights Limitation
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Customary-succession