South Africa: Land Claims Court Support SAFLII

You are here:  SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: Land Claims Court >> 2023 >> [2023] ZALCC 37

| Noteup | LawCite

Kruger v Sibanyoni and Others (LCC119/2020) [2023] ZALCC 37 (26 October 2023)

Download original files

PDF format

RTF format

IN THE LAND CLAIMS COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

HELD AT RANDBURG


Case Number: LCC119/2020

 

Before: The Honourable Acting Judge President Meer

Heard on: 26 October 2023

Delivered on:   26 October 2023


In the matter between:

 

MARIA JOHANNA KRUGER

Applicant

And


TATE MATTHEW SIBANYONI &

SIBANYONI FAMILY  

First Respondent

MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT

AND LAND REFORM

Second Respondent

PROVINCIAL HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT

OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM

Third Respondent

ESKOM HOLDINGS SOC LTD

Fourth Respondent

STEVE TSHWETE MUNICIPALITY

Fifth Respondent

In re:



TATE MATTHEW SIBANYONI &  

SIBANYONI FAMILY


Applicant

And


MARIANNE VAN DER MERWE

AND ANY OTHER PERSON IN CHARGE OF THE

FARM 177, VAALBANK PROTION 13 HENDRINA,

MPUMALANGA

First Respondent

MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT 

AND LAND REFORM

Second Respondent

PROVINCIAL HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT

OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM

Third Respondent

ESKOM HOLDINGS SOC LTD

Fourth Respondent

STEVE TSHWETE MUNICIPALITY

Fifth Respondent


JUDGMENT – APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL DELIVERED ON

26 OCTOBER 2023

MEER, AJP

[1]  The applicant applies for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal against the whole my judgment and order handed down on 7 September 2021. There has been a delay in the bringing of this application as the parties were attempting to settle.

[2]  The judgment considers a landowner’s failure to consent to the installation of electricity to an occupier within the context of the right to human dignity included in section 5(a) of the Extension of Security of Tenure Act 62 of 1997. The judgment finds that the installation of electricity is an improvement that is reasonably necessary to make the occupier’s dwelling habitable, to enable him to exercise his right to human dignity included in section 5(a) of the Act.

[3]  The issue addressed in the judgment is one of important public interest concerning access to electricity in the context of the Bill of Rights. There is thus in my view a compelling reason why the appeal should be heard.

[4] This being so, the application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal is granted. In keeping with the practice of this court not to award costs unless there are exceptional circumstances, of which I find none in this application, there is no order as to costs.

[5] I grant the following order:

The application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal is granted.

There is no order as to costs.

Y S MEER

Acting Judge President

  Land Claims Court


APPEARANCES

 

For the Applicant:   Adv. M Snyman SC

Instructed by:  Brandmullers Inc.

 

For the First Respondent:  Adv. K S Mashaba

Instructed by:  Mthimunye Attorneys