Show simple item record 2017-04-08T17:14:41Z 2017-04-08T17:14:41Z 2011-11-16 en
dc.identifier.citation [2012] ZACC 8
dc.identifier.citation 2012 (7) BCLR 712 (CC)
dc.title Minister for Mineral Resources v Swartland Municipality and Others en
dc.title.alternative CCT102/11 en
dc.identifier.casenumber CCT102/11 en
dc.contributor.judge Jafta J 12 April 2012
dc.concourt.synopsis This case was heard together with Maccsand v City of Cape Town and Others (Chamber of Mines and Agri South Africa as Amici Curiae) CCT 103/11, as both cases dealt with whether an entity granted a mining right in terms of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act 28 of 2002 (MPRDA), which is national law, is obliged in addition to obtain authorization in terms of the Land Use Planning Ordinance 15 of 1985 (LUPO), which is provincial law, and the National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998 (NEMA). Government argued that the statutes were in conflict, and that MPRDA took precedence over LUPO, thus rendering compliance with LUPO requirements unnecessary. The Court held that the MPRDA and LUPO served different purposes, and that there was no conflict between them. Each sphere of government was exercising power allocated to it by the Constitution and regulated by the relevant legislation. It is permissible for one sphere of government to take a decision the implementation of which may not take place until consent is granted by another sphere, within whose area of jurisdiction the decision is to be executed. Judgment: Jafta J (unanimous).
dc.concourt.casehistory Application for leave to appeal against the judgment of the SCA: Louw NO and Others v Swartland Municipality [2011] ZASCA 142. See also earlier Western Cape High Court judgment: Swartland Municipality v Louw NO and Others 2010 (5) SA 314 (WCC) and related CC judgment: Maccsand v City of Cape Town and Others [2012] ZACC 7.

Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search ConCourt Collections


My Account