About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
>>
2023
>>
[2023] ZAGPJHC 1107
|
|
Harmony Gold Mining Company Ltd and Another v Mbatha and Another (2023-0001343) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1107 (4 October 2023)
SAFLII
Note:
Certain
personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been
redacted from this document in compliance with the law
and
SAFLII
Policy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG LOCAL
DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
CASE NO
:
2023-0001343
NOT REPORTABLE
NOT OF INTEREST TO OTHER
JUDGES
NOT REVISED
04/10/23
In
the matter between:
HARMONY
GOLD MINING
COMPANY
LIMITED
[Registration
Number:[…]]
FIRST
APPLICANT
RANDFONTEIN
ESTATES LIMITED
[Registration
Number:[…]]
SECOND
APPLICANT
And
BONGUMUSA
CYPRIAN MBATHA
[Identity
Number:[…]]
FIRST
RESPONDENT
THUTHUKANI
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
NPC
[Registration
Number: […]]
SECOND
RESPONDENT
In
re:
HARMONY
GOLD MINING
COMPANY
LIMITED
[Registration
Number:[…]]
FIRST
APPLICANT
RANDFONTEIN
ESTATES LIMITED
[Registration
Number:[…]]
SECOND
APPLICANT
And
THUTHUKANI
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
NPC
[Registration
Number:[…]]
FIRST
RESPONDENT
BONGUMUSA
CYPRIAN MBATHA
[Identity
Number:[…]]
SECOND
RESPONDENT
And
MPHO
PAKKIES
THIRD
RESPONDENT
KEDIBONE
GLADYS MOLEFE
FOURTH
RESPONDENT
ABERT
TSOTSI MOLEFE
FIFTH
RESPONDENT
SONTO
AYABONGA BIYELA
SIXTH
RESPONDENT
THE
RESIDENTS OF WARD 53
OF
SLOVOVILLE TOWNSHIP AND
SURROUNGS
INVOLVED AND/OR
PARTAKING
IN THE INTERDICTED
ACTIVITIES
SEVENTH
RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
(Leave to Appeal
Application)
SENYATSI J:
[1] This
is
an application for leave to appeal against portions of the judgment
and order I handed down on the 05 July 2023.
[2] The applicant is Mr
Zuko Madikane, a director of the African Black Lawyers Foundation
NPC. He admitted to me during the hearing
of the matter that he acted
for the first and second respondent and that the counsel instructed
through a firm of attorneys was
not available to deal with the
matter.
[3] Mr Madikane raises
the following as grounds of appeal:
(a)
First, there are compelling reasons concerning the constitutionality
of making an adverse finding against another person or
party without
granting them an opportunity to state their side of the story that
warrants leave to appeal being granted to the
SCA; and
(b) Second, there are
reasonable prospects of success that the SCA will reach a different
conclusion to this court on the merits.
[4] It
is a trite principle of our law that leave to appeal may only be
given where the judge or judges concerned are of the opinion
that the
appeal would have reasonable prospect of success or where there is a
compelling reason, including conflicting judgments,
why the appeal
should be heard.
[1]
[5]
The test whether the requirements of section 17(1)(a) of the Act have
been met is a stringent one.
[2]
[6] The grounds of appeal
have been spelt out in the notice of application for leave to appeal
as well as the written submissions
filed by the applicant on 15 July
2023 and will not be repeated in this judgment.
[7] Having
considered the grounds raised in support of the application for leave
to appeal, I am of the view that the threshold
set out in section
17(1) (a) was not met. It should be remembered that the applicant was
not the subject matter of the judgment
in so far as the merits were
concerned. The judgment was referred to the Provincial Director of
Public Prosecutions to investigate
whether the applicant was not in
violation of the Legal Practice Act by acting on behalf of the first
and second respondent through
his non-profit company.
[8] It follows in my
opinion, that there is no prospect that the appeal would succeed.
There are also no compelling reasons why
the appeal should be heard.
ORDER
[9] Accordingly, the
application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.
ML
SENYATSI
JUDGE
OF THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG
DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
Delivered: This Judgment
was handed down electronically by circulation to the parties/ their
legal representatives by email and
by uploading to the electronic
file on Case Lines. The date for hand-down is deemed to be 04 October
2023.
DATE JUDGMENT
RESERVED:
20 September 2023
DATE JUDGMENT
DELIVERED:
04 October 2023
APPEARANCES
For the Applicant:
Mr Z Madikane
(In
Person)
[1]
Section
17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act No.10 of 2013 (“the Act”)
[2]
See
MEC for Health, Eastern Cape v Mkhitha and Another
[2016] ZASCA 176
paras 16-17