South Africa Case Law

Ngomane-Lugedlane Inner Royal Family v Premier of Mpumalanga and Others (A72/2023)

Ngomane-Lugedlane Inner Royal Family v Premier of Mpumalanga and Others (A72/2023) [2025] ZAMPMBHC 4 (24 February 2025)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

A72/2023

Judges

Roelofse, Mphahlele, Ratshibvumo

The court held that section 20(3) of the Mpumalanga Traditional Leadership and Governance Act does not impose a peremptory obligation on the Premier to remove an Inkhosi upon notification by the inner royal family. Instead, the Premier retains a discretion to assess whether the grounds for removal are justifiable and in the interests of the traditional community. The court found that a literal interpretation of 'must' would be inconsistent with the purpose of the Act and constitutional principles, particularly as the Act does not provide for a hearing for the Inkhosi prior to removal. The app…

Source excerpt

• Traditional Leadership Removal
• Statutory Interpretation
• Specific Performance
• Discretion Of Executive
• Customary Law Disputes

Hlamandana and Another v Premier, Eastern Cape Provincial Government and others (2227/2023)

Hlamandana and Another v Premier, Eastern Cape Provincial Government and others (2227/2023) [2025] ZAECMHC 1 (4 February 2025)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

2227/2023

Judge

Zono

The court found that the chairperson's recommendation to remove the first applicant as headman was unlawful, as section 31(14) of the Eastern Cape Traditional Leadership and Governance Act prescribes specific sanctions and does not authorize removal. Only the Royal Family may recommend removal to the Premier, and this jurisdictional fact was absent. The Premier's decision to remove the first applicant was therefore not sourced in law and contravened the doctrine of legality. The chairperson's failure to provide a transcribed record did not constitute a procedural irregularity, as mechanical r…

Source excerpt

• Traditional Leadership Removal
• Jurisdictional Facts
• Statutory Interpretation
• Audi Alteram Partem
• Review Of Administrative Action

Kgoshi Ngoako Isaac Lebogo and Another v Headman Matome Kobe and Others (1204/2021)

Kgoshi Ngoako Isaac Lebogo and Another v Headman Matome Kobe and Others (1204/2021) [2024] ZASCA 160 (18 November 2024)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1204/2021

Judges

Mocumie, Schippers, Mothle, Weiner, Molefe

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the review application was instituted almost six years after the respondents became aware of the Premier's decision to remove them as headmen/headwomen. The respondents failed to provide a full and reasonable explanation for the delay and did not bring a proper condonation application. The court found that internal remedies under s 21 of the Framework Act were not applicable, as the Premier was the decision-maker and could not simultaneously act as a party and resolver of the dispute. The delay was inordinate and largely unexplained, undermining the princ…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Customary Law Leadership
• Undue Delay
• Condonation
• Traditional Leadership Removal

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

Rikhotso v Premier Limpopo Province and Others (943/2017)

Rikhotso v Premier Limpopo Province and Others (943/2017) [2022] ZALMPTHC 6 (9 May 2022)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Thohoyandou

Case number

943/2017

Judge

AML Phatudi

The High Court set aside the removal of a headman and the termination of his salary, holding that the Nsavulani Royal Family had not recommended removal as required by provincial law.

• Traditional Leadership Removal
• Customary Law Application
• Administrative Review
• Limpopo Traditional Leadership Act
• Administrative-review
• Traditional-leadership

B.B.R v Limpopo House of Traditional Leaders and Others (HCAA11/2021 1459/2017)

B.B.R v Limpopo House of Traditional Leaders and Others (HCAA11/2021 1459/2017) [2022] ZALMPPHC 17 (16 March 2022)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

HCAA11/2021 1459/2017

Judges

Makgoba, G C Muller, K L Pillay

The court found that the meeting of 30 October 2016, at which the resolution to remove the Second Respondent was adopted, was not a legitimate meeting of the royal family as required by the Limpopo Act. The attendees were not properly identified as royal family members, and the structure lacked legitimacy. The Premier was therefore not obliged to act on the purported request for removal. The appeal was dismissed as the applicant failed to prove that the resolution emanated from the legitimate royal family, and the statutory requirements for removal were not met.

Source excerpt

• Traditional Leadership Removal
• Customary Law
• Legitimacy Of Royal Family
• Limpopo Traditional Leadership Act

Kobe and Others v Lebogo and Others (HCAA14/2020)

Kobe and Others v Lebogo and Others (HCAA14/2020) [2021] ZALMPPHC 31 (28 June 2021)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

HCAA14/2020

Judges

MF Kganyago, EM Makgoba, G Muller

The court found that the appellants were not required to bring a condonation application for late filing of their review application, as they instituted proceedings within the 180-day period after exhausting internal remedies, as required by PAJA. The process of removing the appellants as headmen/women was procedurally unfair and did not comply with statutory and constitutional requirements. The appellants were not properly notified, were denied a fair hearing, and did not receive written reasons for their removal. The identification of their successors was not conducted by the appropriate ro…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Traditional Leadership Removal
• Audi Alteram Partem
• Condonation For Late Review
• Customary Law Procedure

Seleka v Seleka Royal Family and Others (HCAA21/2018)

Seleka v Seleka Royal Family and Others (HCAA21/2018) [2021] ZALMPPHC 28 (28 May 2021)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

HCAA21/2018

Judges

GC Muller, MV Semenya, EM Makwela

The Full Court held that the trial court committed a serious procedural irregularity by failing to inform the appellant, who appeared in person, of his right to cross-examine a witness and by excusing the witness without affording the appellant the opportunity to do so. This irregularity prejudiced the appellant and resulted in an unfair trial, violating section 34 of the Constitution. The right to cross-examination is a deeply entrenched procedural right in civil proceedings and is essential to the fairness of the trial. The irregularity was sufficiently serious to vitiate the proceedings, w…

Source excerpt

• Right To Fair Trial
• Cross Examination
• Traditional Leadership Removal
• Locus Standi
• Limpopo Traditional Leadership Act
• Customary Law Procedure

Royal Family of Amadlomo and Another v Premier of the Eastern Cape and Others (1944/2020)

Royal Family of Amadlomo and Another v Premier of the Eastern Cape and Others (1944/2020) [2020] ZAECMHC 29 (23 July 2020)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

1944/2020

Judge

Mbhele

The High Court dismissed an urgent challenge to the termination of an acting AbaThembu kingship, finding it lapsed automatically by law and that the vehicle was lawfully recovered.

• Traditional Leadership Removal
• Mandament Van Spolie
• Certificate Of Recognition
• Procedural Fairness
• Joinder
• Authority To Institute Proceedings

Bakubung ba Ratheo Traditional Community and Another v Gumbi N.O. and Others (UM48/2017)

Bakubung ba Ratheo Traditional Community and Another v Gumbi N.O. and Others (UM48/2017) [2017] ZANWHC 88 (8 December 2017)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

UM48/2017

Judge

GUTTA

High Court interim relief preserved disputed Bakubung trust funds pending final determination, limited to the transferred amount and related accounts.

• Trust Funds Preservation
• Fiduciary Duties Of Trustees
• Urgent Interdict
• Traditional Leadership Removal
• Notarial Lease Payments
• Bank Account Freezing