CCT51/13

[2013] ZACC 45

2014 (2) BCLR 212 (CC)

2014 (2) SA 603 (CC)

Jafta J Majority judgment

Moseneke DCJ separate judgment

12 December 2013

http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/3716

Application for leave to appeal against a judgment of the SCA: Minister of Mineral Resources of the Republic of South Africa and Others v Sishen Iron Ore Company (pty) Ltd and Another (394/12) [2013] ZASCA 50; 2013 (4) SA 461 (SCA); [2013] 3 All SA 270 (SCA) (28 March 2013). The case was heard earlier in the Pretoria High Court: Sishen Iron Ore Company (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Mineral Resources and Others (28980/10) [2012] ZAGPPHC 2 (3 February 2012) (Judgment on the application to strike out) and Sishen Iron Ore Company (Pty) Ltd and Another v Minister of Mineral Resources and Others (28980/10) [2011] ZAGPPHC 220 (20 December 2011).

Application for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Supreme Court of Appeal concerning the conversion of old order mining rights in terms of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act 28 of 2002 (MPRDA). The first respondent held 78.6% and the second respondent held 21.4% in undivided shares of an old order mining right under the 1991 Minerals Act. The first respondent applied to convert its right under the MPRDA but the second respondent failed to do so. The Court granted leave to appeal to the first to fourth applicants (the state parties) but refused leave to the fifth applicant. The appeal was upheld in part and the orders of the High Court and the Supreme Court of Appeal were overturned. The main judgment held that the second respondent’s 21.4% undivided share in the old order mining right ceased to exist on the date on which the period for conversion expired. The first respondent could not have applied for and obtained conversion of something more than its own old order mining right, comprising its 78.6% undivided share. A separate concurrence held that the second respondent’s undivided share became available for reallocation by the state once the old order mining right ceased to exist, but it was open only to the first respondent to apply for that right. Main judgment: Jafta J (Mogoeng CJ, Moseneke DCJ, Madlanga J, Mhlantla AJ, Nkabinde J, Skweyiya J and Van der Westhuizen J concurring). Separate concurrence: Moseneke DCJ (Mogoeng CJ, Cameron J, Froneman J, Jafta J, Madlanga J, Mhlantla AJ, Nkabinde J, Skweyiya J and Van der Westhuizen J concurring).