Fin24

Ruling opens state to restitution claims

2011-04-28 16:48

Johannesburg - Mineral rights holders, who forfeited their rights when the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) came into effect in 2004, are entitled to claim for financial loss suffered as a result of the expropriation, Agri SA said following a ruling by the High Court in Pretoria on Thursday.

The judgment handed down by Judge Ben du Plessis serves as a direction-giving ruling in terms of protecting property rights, the farming body's president Johannes Möller said.

"Agri SA's intention with this test case was to prove (the) expropriation of mineral rights... would oblige the state to pay compensation. This ruling confirms the fundamental principle in Section 25 of the constitution, namely that property cannot be expropriated without compensation."

Du Plessis found that "for the reasons stated the objects of the MPRDA could not be achieved without depriving mineral rights holders of their property and without vesting in the state similar rights. While not expressly stated, expropriation was one of the purposes of the MPRDA."

Ahead of the ruling, Agri SA had asked those who suffered financial loss to lodge claims by April 30. Agri SA had compiled a guideline for instituting claims for compensation, which was forwarded to all provincial agricultural unions affiliated with the organisation.

 

Comments
  • Hardtalk - 2011-04-28 17:30

    Good make them pay, they steal and cheat and lie. Now see if they have the money to nationalize the mines, now they cannot steal them. I believe in fare share for all, but if they get the mines it will only give the ANC more money to waste and squander on their own greed.

      amos - 2011-04-28 18:18

      Are you referring to the white men who lied, cheated and stole the land from the indigenous people ?

      Juggernaut - 2011-04-28 19:01

      Amos the indigenous people had NOTHING other than maybe the Khoi and they had very few mining assets to mine.

      Valis - 2011-04-28 19:10

      @amos: Hahahahahaha! Unless you are Khoi or San you are NOT indigenous to South Africa.

      Tinus Geldenhuys - 2011-04-28 19:10

      No Amos, unless you are reffering to the Koi and San as the indigenous people. And no, the land was traded. The current land owners PAID for the property.

      Blougroen - 2011-04-29 02:17

      @amos - ha ha - so you think "\ the so-called "indigenous peoples" occupied all of southern africa ?????? In 1913 the British Governmnet more or less set aside all the areas where the so-called "indigenous peoples" that migrated from the north lived - some of it stolen from the Koi and the San. Go back to where you came from and give the land back to the Koi and the San.

  • Tereblanche - 2011-04-28 17:39

    I bet you if this judgement was to be challenged in either supreme court or Constitutional court, you mazy find that this judge used his rightwing mentality that refuses to be transformed liek Juju said, what a legally illeterate judgment. This rightwingers must never be allowed space to breath in our newly transformed society from this apartheid mentality/ operators.......

      william.botha - 2011-04-28 18:02

      The only one with a illiterate mind is you. and the Malema clan. The constitution remains the ultimate authority mamparra Tereblanche wannabee.

      mursebul - 2011-04-28 18:10

      You doushbag!!!!! How many farmers had to give up the rights ast what is under their ground, one case in discussion is the mine that had gained access to a farm where conservation is key, and now they want to screw up the area, water and ground, all above farming and those that is suppose to supply us with food... Guess your left minded arguments ois nothing but sh#t on the brain, my suggestion, get some medical help, the vet could help uthenise you with ease . . .

      croix - 2011-04-29 06:40

      Haai shame! Are you still clinging on your blame for 'apartheid'? You should get an education, skills training or just plain counselling and then learn what it is to WORK for 'self betterment'. I suppose you could always approach the high court for 'compensation' too - the "I want everything for free and thrown in my lap"-mentality is still so rife all over Africa, and RSA is no exception.

  • Nuck Choris - 2011-04-28 17:40

    This is a fantastic ruling

      carjan - 2011-04-29 10:12

      And the fact of the matter is the High Court of Appeal, and also the Con Court WILL endorse this ruling, based on the ANC's OWN constitution - MORONS and IDIOTS

  • Ano Nymous - 2011-04-28 17:50

    I guess a mining company would have had to mine x Rands worth of diamonds, say, for me to institute a claim of x Rand? If no-one has yet mined on my farm, I cannot prove the loss?

      Martin du Plessis - 2011-04-28 18:58

      If you lost the farm, yes, you have had a HUGE loss. The loss of the FARM.

  • Justin Schonegevel - 2011-04-28 18:53

    Think Afriforum and Agri SA should run for elections. be interesting!

  • croix - 2011-04-29 06:54

    Wonderful news! Suffer the "little children" - who do not yet know the time of simply 'TAKING' is over.

  • pages:
  • 1