Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Limcroma Properties (Pty) Ltd v Jonker (2236/2024) [2024] ZANWHC 180 (14 May 2024)
The High Court granted urgent spoliation and interdict relief, finding the respondent’s cattle and remaining property unlawfully interfered with the applicant’s possession.
Rampai v Claasen (LCC98/2019) [2019] ZALCC 26 (17 October 2019)
The Land Claims Court granted an urgent interdict stopping removal of the applicant’s livestock under an ESTA section 7(1) notice, and made no costs order.
Kubheka v Tonkin and Another (LCC148/2018) [2019] ZALCC 28 (4 January 2019)
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
Mthethwa and Others v Bester and Others (LCC112/2011) [2018] ZALCC 39 (20 April 2018)
The applicants failed to establish a clear right to unrestricted grazing or to keep livestock beyond the agreed limits. The evidence, including expert and official reports, confirmed that the grazing area was overstocked and environmentally degraded due to overgrazing by the applicants' livestock. The first respondent was entitled to restrict grazing to prevent further contravention of CARA and environmental harm. The applicants did not challenge the expert recommendations for removal of all livestock, and the court accepted these recommendations as necessary for rehabilitation. The main appl…
Source excerpt
Tlokwe Local Municipality v Gqweta and Others (34243/2016) [2018] ZAGPPHC 770 (13 February 2018)
The High Court held that a municipality validly cancelled a grazing agreement after a material breach and ordered removal of livestock over six months.
Adendorffs Boerderye v Shabalala and Others (997/15) [2017] ZASCA 37 (29 March 2017)
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
Normandien Farms (Pty) Ltd v Mathimbane and Others (LCC196/2013) [2015] ZALCC 14; 2017 (5) SA 204 (LCC) (5 November 2015)
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
Khuis Communal Property Association v Gaotsenwe (77/2011) [2011] ZANCHC 26 (9 September 2011)
The court upheld an interdict enforcing a communal property committee’s land allocation, ordering removal of livestock from the Garona Camp and costs against the respondent.
Explore more
