About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
>>
2016
>>
[2016] ZAGPPHC 254
|
|
Barberton Mines (Pty) Ltd v Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency and Others (43125/13) [2016] ZAGPPHC 254 (18 February 2016)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
SOUTH AFRICA
(GAUTENG DIVISION,
PRETORIA)
CASE
NO: 43125/13
18/2/2016
Not
reportable
Not
of interest to other judges
Revised
In
the matter between:
BARBERTON
MINES (PTY)
LTD
Applicant
and
MPUMALANGA
TOURISM AND PARKS AGENCY
1
st
Respondent
MOUNTAINLANDS
OWNERS ASSOCIATION
2
nd
Respondent
THE
TRUSTEES FOR THE TIME BEING OF
THE
3
rd
Respondent
LOMSHIYO TRUST
WAY
PROP TWO (PTY)
LTD
4
th
Respondent
SIMPLY
SEE (PTY)
LTD
5
th
Respondent
THE
DEPUTY DIRECTOR
GENERAL:
6
th
Respondent
DEPARTMENT OF MINERAL
RESOURCES
THE
REGIONAL MANAGER:
EMALAHLENI
7
th
Respondent
REGIONAL OFFICE,
DEPARTMENT OF
MINERAL
RESOURCES
THE DIRECTOR GENERAL:
DEPARTMENT OF
MINERAL
RESOURCES
8
th
Respondent
THE
MINISTER OF MINERAL
RESOURCES
9
th
Respondent
APPLICATION FOR LEAVE
TO APPEAL JUDGMENT
Bagwa
J
[1]
This is an application for leave to appeal against my judgment of 28
October 2015 by the first and second respondent.
[2]
The grounds for the application are set out in detail in the
application for leave and I do not propose to repeat those in this
brief ex
tempore
judgment.
[3]
Making reference to those grounds Mr Wesley has addressed me
comprehensively expanding on those grounds. Mr Lazarus in his equally
comprehensive address and with reference to his heads of argument has
sought to persuade me not to grant leave to appeal.
[4]
It is correct that whilst the facts of the case may be simple
and easy to comprehend, those facts, the relevant statutory
and case
law on which the parties base their respective cases raise difficult
and novel points of law which can be subject to different
ways of
interpretation.
[5]
On that basis, I am of the view that another court could possibly
come to a conclusion different from the one reached in my
judgment.
[6]
In the result the following order is made:
6.1. Leave is granted to
appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal against the whole judgment and
order including the order for costs
against the first and second
respondents only.
6.2. Costs to be costs in
the Appeal.
_________________________
S.A.M.
BAQWA
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION,
PRETORIA
Date
of Hearing: 18
February 2016
Date
of Judgment:
18 February 2016
For
the Applicant:
Adv. P. Lazarus (SC)
Instructed
by:
Malan Scholes Incorporated
For
the Respondents: Adv. M. A.
Wesley (SC)
Instructed
by:
Richard
Spoor Incorporated
(1
st
to 5
th
Respondents)
Instructed
by:
The State Attorney
(6th to 9th Respondents)