Synopsis:
Application for leave to appeal concerning the Land Claims Court’s reliance on the Supreme Court of Appeal decision in King Sabata Dalindyebo Municipality v KwaLindile Community , which this Court later set aside. The applicant averred that the Land Claims Court should have granted the interdict because it was compulsory for the Municipality to apply for an order in terms of section 34(1) of the Restitution Act, but it had not done so, and that the Land Claims Court was wrong in holding that he had not complied with the notice procedures required by section 6(3)-(7) of the Restitution Act. The Court held that even if it were to assume in favour of the applicant on the notice requirements, the appeal had no prospect of success. It held that the contentions of the applicant do not meet head on the reasoning of the Land Claims Court that the balance of convenience or fairness did not favour him. Leave to appeal was refused.
Judgment of the Court: (Mogoeng CJ, Moseneke DCJ, Bosielo AJ, Froneman J, Jafta J, Khampepe J, Mhlantla AJ, Nkabinde J, Skweyiya J, and Zondo J) .
