South Africa Case Law

Loskop Landgoed Boerdery (Pty) Ltd and Others v Petrus Moeleso and Others (390/2021)

Loskop Landgoed Boerdery (Pty) Ltd and Others v Petrus Moeleso and Others (390/2021) [2022] ZASCA 53 (12 April 2022)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

390/2021

Judges

Van der Merwe, Mocumie, Nicholls, Mbatha, Carelse

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the reduction of the respondents' grazing area and relocation of their cattle within the farm, without their consent or a court order, constituted spoliation rather than eviction under ESTA. The respondents were deprived of peaceful possession of the two grazing camps, and the appellants' self-help remedy was unlawful. The Land Claims Court was correct to grant a restoration order but erred in granting an order for alternative grazing rights not sought in the pleadings and without procedural fairness. The costs order against the appellants was unwarranted…

Source excerpt

• Extension Of Security Of Tenure Act
• Mandament Van Spolie
• Overgrazing
• Self Help Remedy
• Restoration Of Possession

Brink v Dell and Others (3898/2021)

Brink v Dell and Others (3898/2021) [2021] ZAFSHC 329 (12 December 2021)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

3898/2021

Judge

Loubser

The court found that the applicant was not entitled to cancel the notarial lease agreement. The respondent provided a credible version supported by expert evidence that the alleged breaches—overgrazing and failure to control invasive species—did not occur as claimed. The respondent's rotational grazing practices and ongoing control of invasive weeds were consistent with the lease terms. The presence of sub-tenants was not a breach, as written consent had been obtained. The court applied the Plascon Evans rule, adjudicating the matter on the respondent's version due to the real dispute of fact…

Source excerpt

• Notarial Lease Cancellation
• Breach Of Lease
• Overgrazing
• Invasive Species Control

Tsotetsi and Others v Raubenheimer N.O and Others (LCC140/2020)

Tsotetsi and Others v Raubenheimer N.O and Others (LCC140/2020) [2021] ZALCC 2; 2021 (5) SA 293 (LCC) (18 January 2021)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC140/2020

Judges

Cowen, Meer

The Land Claims Court held that the Magistrates Court had jurisdiction under section 19(1)(b) of ESTA to grant interdicts and declaratory orders in matters sufficiently connected to ESTA, including disputes over grazing rights of occupiers. The orders granted by the Magistrate were found to be mandatory and prohibitory interdicts in terms of ESTA, as the right to keep cattle was integrally connected to the Appellants' occupation and use of the land. The evidence established severe overgrazing of the allocated area, justifying the removal of cattle for rehabilitation. The Appellants failed to…

Source excerpt

• Extension Of Security Of Tenure Act
• Conservation Of Agricultural Resources Act
• Magistrates Court Jurisdiction
• Overgrazing
• Mandatory Interdict
• Costs In Esta Matters

Kubheka v Tonkin and Another (LCC148/2018)

Kubheka v Tonkin and Another (LCC148/2018) [2019] ZALCC 28 (4 January 2019)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC148/2018

Judge

T M Ncube

The court found that the demarcated grazing camp was severely overgrazed, with the applicant keeping livestock far in excess of the permitted number. Expert evidence confirmed that the veld was overstocked and required a rest period of two to three years for recovery. The statutory duty under CARA to prevent overgrazing applies to both the owner and occupier, and the applicant's continued grazing contravened these obligations. The argument that the respondents unlawfully reduced the grazing camp was rejected, as both parties agreed overgrazing had occurred regardless of the camp's size. The D…

Source excerpt

• Overgrazing
• Conservation Of Agricultural Resources Act
• Removal Of Livestock
• Mandamus Interdict

Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd v Mkhwanazi and Others (LCC224/2017)

Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd v Mkhwanazi and Others (LCC224/2017) [2018] ZALCC 8 (2 May 2018)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC 224/2017

Judge

Molefe

The court found that although the relocation order did not specify the maximum number of animal units, the permissible carrying capacity of Maggies Deel is 85–89 animal units, as established by an agricultural expert report that formed part of the negotiations leading to the relocation. The respondents undertook to comply with this capacity. Evidence from the applicant's environmental officers confirmed that the respondents have exceeded this limit and allowed livestock to roam onto protected wetlands and neighbouring properties, causing environmental harm. The respondents' arguments regardin…

Source excerpt

• Extension Of Security Of Tenure Act
• Overgrazing
• Interdict
• Environmental Protection
• Eviction Procedure

Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform v Normandien Farms (Pty) Ltd and Others, Mathibane and Others v Normandien Farms (Pty) Ltd and Others (370/2017)

Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform v Normandien Farms (Pty) Ltd and Others, Mathibane and Others v Normandien Farms (Pty) Ltd and Others (370/2017) [2017] ZASCA 163; [2018] 1 All SA 390 (SCA); 2019 (1) SA 154 (SCA) (29 November 2017)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

370/2017

Judges

Leach, Saldulker, Swain, Lamont, Rogers

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Land Claims Court erred in compelling the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform to provide alternative grazing land, as the relevant statutory powers are permissive and not obligatory. The Minister's appeal was upheld, and the costs order against him was set aside, with each party to bear its own costs in line with the Biowatch principle. Normandien Farms was found to have standing to seek removal of livestock under the Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act, and the removal of livestock due to overgrazing does not constitute an eviction u…

Source excerpt

• Labour Tenants
• Overgrazing
• Condonation And Reinstatement
• Contempt Of Court
• Costs Awards
• Ministerial Powers

Adendorffs Boerderye v Shabalala and Others (997/15)

Adendorffs Boerderye v Shabalala and Others (997/15) [2017] ZASCA 37 (29 March 2017)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

997/15

Judges

Shongwe, Majiedt, Mathopo, Van der Merwe, Mbatha

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Land Claims Court erred by granting orders not sought or pleaded by the parties, including obligations for the appellant to provide alternative grazing and for the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform to secure grazing for the respondents. The court found that both landowner and land user share responsibility under CARA to prevent overgrazing, but CARA does not preclude civil proceedings by the landowner to enforce rights or remedies. The respondents' grazing rights derived from agreement, not from ESTA or labour tenancy, and the Minister was…

Source excerpt

• Conservation Of Agricultural Resources Act
• Overgrazing
• Removal Of Livestock
• Court Orders
• Costs De Bonis Propriis

Normandien Farms (Pty) Ltd v Mathimbane and Others (LCC196/2013)

Normandien Farms (Pty) Ltd v Mathimbane and Others (LCC196/2013) [2015] ZALCC 14; 2017 (5) SA 204 (LCC) (5 November 2015)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC 196/2013

Judge

Y Meer

The court found that the applicant had locus standi to bring the main application under CARA, the Labour Tenants Act, NEMA, and the Constitution, as the relief sought promoted environmental protection and conservation. The respondents' counterclaim for award of land and compensation failed because there was no proof of a valid application for an award in land under the Labour Tenants Act before the statutory cut-off date, and the court lacked authority to grant such relief. The State respondents' failure to act under CARA was noted, but the fourteenth respondent was ordered to make alternativ…

Source excerpt

• Overgrazing
• Conservation Of Agricultural Resources Act
• Labour Tenants Act
• Environmental Rights
• Locus Standi
• Removal Of Livestock

Van Den Heerven v Van Wyk (816/04)

Van Den Heerven v Van Wyk (816/04) [2004] ZANCHC 22 (6 August 2004)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

816/04

Judge

C.C Williams

The court granted execution of a spoliation order pending appeal, finding the applicant faced greater harm from continued grazing and overuse of the land.

• Mandament Van Spolie
• Execution Pending Appeal
• Overgrazing
• Irreparable Harm
• Balance Of Convenience
• Mandament-van-spolie