http://www.polity.org.za
Deepening Democracy through Access to Information
Home / Case Law / All Case Law RSS ← Back
Mining|Resources|Shanduka Resources|Shanduka Resources (pty) Ltd|Respective Applications|Western Cape|Nickel Mining (Pty)
Mining|Resources||||
mining|resources|shanduka-resources|shanduka-resources-pty-ltd|respective-applications|western-cape|nickel-mining-pty
Close

Email this article

separate emails by commas, maximum limit of 4 addresses

Verification Image. Please refresh the page if you cannot see this image.

Sponsored by

Close

Article Enquiry

Shanduka Resources (Pty) Ltd v Western Cape Nickel Mining (Pty) Ltd and Others (A324/2016) [2017] ZAWCHC 7

Verification Image. Please refresh the page if you cannot see this image.
Close

Embed Video

Shanduka Resources (Pty) Ltd v Western Cape Nickel Mining (Pty) Ltd and Others (A324/2016) [2017] ZAWCHC 7

17th February 2017

SAVE THIS ARTICLE      EMAIL THIS ARTICLE

Font size: -+

This appeal is from a judgment of Weinkove AJ sitting as a single judge at first instance.  It was brought with the leave of the learned acting judge.

The history is relatively complex, with a small host of characters having been involved in various roles in the three applications that came up for hearing together in the court of first instance.  The description of the facts will be easier to follow if I refer to the personalities that were involved by their names or positions, rather than by their respective roles as parties cited in the appeal.  When convenient, the individually cited functionaries of the Department of Mineral Resources (the minister, the deputy director-general and the regional manager (Western Cape), respectively) will be referred to collectively as ‘the Department’ or ‘the government parties’.

Advertisement

The issue centrally in contention in the litigation was how the competition between the appellant, Shanduka Resources (Pty) Ltd (Shanduka), and the first respondent, Western Cape Nickel Mining (Pty) Ltd (WC Nickel), for recognition as the first-in-time applicant for prospecting rights in respect of nickel ore and various other minerals over Portion 2 of the farm Nuwefontein 6, Van Rhynsdorp, Western Cape should be determined.  There was some dispute as to whether WC Nickel had effectively lodged an application, but both companies had been advised by the regional manager that their respective applications could not be accepted because the rights were already held by Hondekloof Nickel (Pty) Ltd (the fifth respondent, hereinafter referred to simply as ‘Hondekloof’).

To watch Creamer Media's latest video reports, click here
 
Advertisement
  • Shanduka Resources (Pty) Ltd v Western Cape Nickel Mining (Pty) Ltd and Others (A324/2016) [2017] ZAWCHC 7
    Download
    0.34 MB
Sponsored by

EMAIL THIS ARTICLE      SAVE THIS ARTICLE ARTICLE ENQUIRY

To subscribe email subscriptions@creamermedia.co.za or click here
To advertise email advertising@creamermedia.co.za or click here

Comment Guidelines

About

Polity.org.za is a product of Creamer Media.
www.creamermedia.co.za

Other Creamer Media Products include:
Engineering News
Mining Weekly
Research Channel Africa

Read more

Subscriptions

We offer a variety of subscriptions to our Magazine, Website, PDF Reports and our photo library.

Subscriptions are available via the Creamer Media Store.

View store

Advertise

Advertising on Polity.org.za is an effective way to build and consolidate a company's profile among clients and prospective clients. Email advertising@creamermedia.co.za

View options
Free daily email newsletter Register Now