The government’s delay in finalising land restitution claims brought almost 30 years ago has complicated things for a Limpopo community.
Dikgalaopeng, a community in Tafelkop, is embroiled in a legal battle against two companies that are building a shopping complex on the land it claimed back in 1997.
In a fresh round of the courtroom battles over the land valued at R10 million, Tafelkop (PTY) Ltd and Fontis Developments (PTY) Ltd scored a victory against the community at the Land Claims Court (LCC) on Friday.
Acting Judge President of the LCC Yasmin Meer ruled in favour of the application brought by the two companies.
They dragged the community to court to fight it over a victory it scored at the Groblersdal Magistrate’s Court on March 22.
This magistrate’s court interdicted Fontis from continuing with the development of a shopping complex on the claimed land, known as farm Eengevonden.
Tafelkop (PTY) Ltd and Fontis argued before Judge Meer that the magistrate’s court should have heard the matter for lack of jurisdiction.
They submitted that the LCC had exclusive jurisdiction on the matter in terms of the Restitution Act.
Judge Meer found in favour of this argument. She said: “That this Court has sole jurisdiction in respect of the subject matter of the interdict is evident from ... the Restitution Act.
“The subject matter of the application before the magistrate has its genesis in the Restitution Act, over which this court has exclusive jurisdiction.
“The right which the (Dikgalaopeng community) sought to protect by applying for the interdict was their right to restitution, which the development by the applicants of the land claimed by them, could compromise.”
The magistrate’s court monetary claims jurisdictional limit was another issue for Judge Meer. She pointed out that the Magistrates Court Act stipulated that regional magistrates’ courts entertained matters in which not more than R400 000 was at stake.
“The applicants’ value of the undeveloped land of R10m is not disputed, and clearly places this matter beyond the jurisdiction of the magistrates’ court,” she said.
“... I am satisfied that the order of the magistrate stands to be reviewed and set aside.”
Howard Mahlase, lawyer for Dikgalaopeng community, told The Star yesterday that his client made an interdict application at the magistrate’s court due to financial constraints.
“The community went to the magistrate’s court to get an interdict because there was no other option. The community does not have money,” he said.
But Judge Meer’s ruling did not signal the end of the community’s fight against Tafelkop (PTY) Ltd and Fontis, said Mahlase.
“The LCC decided only on the issue of jurisdiction, that the magistrate’s court lacks jurisdiction to determine the matter. It did not entertain the merits of the case.
“We’re still going to pursue the matter with regards to its merits. The matter is not yet over.
“The community is saying that nothing should happen on that land until the finalisation of the claim,” he said.
At the heart of the matter was the Land Claims Commission’s slow pace in finalising a restitution application that Dikgalaopeng made in 1997, Mahlase said. Thousands of land claims made in 1996 and 1997 remained unfinalised.
Said Mahlase: “The delay of the Land Claims Commission in finalising matters disadvantages indigent communities.
“The commission should finalise the claims to avoid situations like this one.”
@BonganiNkosi87