IN THE LAND CLAIMS COURT Of SOUTH 
AFICA HELD AT RANDBURG
CASE NO: LCC 196/2013
Before: The Honourable AJP Meer 
Heard on: 16 February 2016
Delivered on: 16 February 2016

In the matter between:
NORMANDIEN FARMS (PTY) LTD                                                                                                                                              Applicant 
and                
MANDLA NKOSI JOSEPH MATHIMBANE                                                                                         First Respondent
BONGINKOSI DAVID MATHIMBANE                                                                                                 Second Respondent
PHUMELELO FLORENCE MATHIMBANE                                                                                       Third Respondent
MLAMULI OBED MATHIMBANE                                                                                                                 Fourth Respondent
SIPHO MATHIMBANE                                                                                                                                                           Fifth Respondent
MARIAM JELE                                                                                                                                                                               Sixth Respondent 
BERNARD JELE                                                                                                                                                               Seventh Respondent 
MARTHA JELE                                                                                                                                                                          Eighth Respondent 
ALBERT JELE                                                                                                                                                                                Ninth Respondent 
APOSTOL JELE                                                                                                                                                                        Tenth   Respondent
SWEET BETTER JELE                                                                                                                                          Eleventh Respondent
JOHANNES JELE                                                                                                                                                                Twelfth Respondent
THE MINISTER OF THE NATIONAL 
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 
FORESTRY AND FISHERIES                                                                                                                Thirteenth Respondent
THE MINISTER OF RURAL
DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM                                                                                Fourteenth Respondent
THE REGIONAL LAND CLAIMS
COMMISSIONER,   KWAZULU-NATAL                                                                                       Fifteenth Respondent
JUDGEMENT
[1] Two applications for leave to appeal against my judgement of 05 November 2015 have been filed. The first application ("first application") by the parties who were the First to Twelfth Respondents in the main application, appeals to the Supreme Court of Appeal against the whole   of my judgement and order. The second application ("second application''), brought by the Fourteenth Respondent in the main application, appeals against paragraphs 3, 4, and 5 of the order in my judgement of 5 November 2015.
[2] The grounds of appeal in both applications, in the main traverse issues in respect of which reasoned findings are made in the judgement.   It will thus serve little purpose to repeat these here, save for the following comments: -
[3] The first application in essence takes issue, inter-alia, with my findings on the counter-claim, the application to strike out my interpretation of the legislation being the various Acts dealt with in the judgement, my findings on costs and locus standi.
[4] Mr Shakoane in addition submitted that there was a compelling reason why the appeal should be heard, namely that this matter involves two conflicting judgements and orders of this court. This is a reference to my judgement of 5 November 2014 and the order of Sardiwalla AJ of 02 April 2014, (referred to in my judgment), which made an agreement by the parties before him an order of Court. His order conferred labour tenancy status on the Plaintiffs in the matter before him and ordered certain conduct flowing therefrom.     My judgement and order dealt with a separate matter as is evident from the pleadings and record. The two orders cannot therefore be said to conflict in respect of the same   matter, albeit that the two orders accepted the labour tenancy status of the First to Twelfth Plaintiffs/ Respondents and both orders pertain to them.
[5] The second application   for   leave   to   appeal   by   the   fourteenth Respondent similarly takes issue with my interpretation   of   the   Land   Reform Labour Tenants Act 3 of 1996, the Conservation of Agricultural Resources   Act   43   of   1983("CARA")   and   the   Land   Reform   Provision   of
land and Assistance Act 126 of 1993, as well as my findings on costs.
[6] As aforementioned my reasoned findings on ail aspects with which issue is taken in both applications for leave to appeal, appear clearly in my judgement in response to the arguments presented at the hearing and mirrored in both applications for leave to appeal. They are, not of course repeated here.
[7] I have carefully considered the submissions by Mr Shakoane and   Ms Norman and have reflected   dispassionately   upon   my   decision   after hearing their arguments. I am of the view that another Court   would   not   come to a decision different to mine in respect   of   the   issues   raised   by   them. There are accordingly, in my view no reasonable   prospects   of   success on appeal. This   being   so   both   applications   for   leave   to   appeal stand to be dismissed.   In   keeping with the practice   of   this   Court,   I   make no order as to   costs.
I order as follows:
The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed. There is no order as to costs.
___________________________
Meer Y S
Acting Judge President of the Land Claims Court
  
Appearances:

Counsel for   the Applicant:
Adv G Roberts SC
Adv C Hattingh
  
Attorneys for the Applicant:
Peter Vinnicombe & Associates, Durban.

Counsel for   the 1st to   12th Respondent:
Adv G Shakoane SC Adv M Kgariya

Attorneys for the 1st   to 12th Respondent:
MC Ntshalintshali & Associates, Durban.
  
Counsel for the 1st to 12th Respondent:
Adv T Norman SC Adv Z P Mhlongo
Attorneys for the 13th Respondent:
State Attorney, Durban