Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii

[1]        The applicants approached this Court seeking the following order in terms of the Notice of Motion:

“1.       An order declaring that the First Respondent has acted in breach of his statutory obligations, imposed by the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act 28 of 2002, by failing to act against the Fifth Respondent for its failure to implement the Social and Labour Plans over the period 2014 until 2017; and

2.         An order declaring the conduct of the First, Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Respondents, separately alternatively jointly, to be unlawful and inconsistent with section 24(b)(iii) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa; and

3.         An order directing the First Respondent to suspend the mining right(s) and/or permit(s) granted to the Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Respondents, in respect of its Marikana operations, until such time as the Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Respondents have complied with obligations in terms of the Social and Labour Plan for 2014 – 2018; and

4.         An interdict restraining the Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Respondents from disposing, ceding and/or transferring the mining right(s) and/or permits(s) granted by the Department of Mineral Resources in respect of its Marikana operations, pending the implementation of its obligations arising from the Social and Labour Plan 2014 – 2018; and

5.         That the First, Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Respondents separately alternatively jointly be ordered to pay costs of this application in the event of the matter being opposed.”