IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA SCA CASE NO: 1105/2019 KZP CASE NO: 11488/17P In the matter between: GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL TRUST First Appellant (1st Applicant in the court a quo) MFOLOZI COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ORGANISATION (2nd Applicant in the court a quo) SABELO DUMISANI DLADLA Third Appellant (3rd Applicant in the court a quo) and TENDELE COAL MINING (PTY) LTD First Respondent (1st Respondent in the court a quo) MINISTER OF MINERALS AND ENERGY Second Respondent (2 nd Respondent in the court a quo) MEC: DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TOURISM AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS Third Respondent (3rd Respondent in the court a quo) MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS Fourth Respondent (4th Respondent in the court a quo) MTUBATUBA MUNICIPALITY Fifth Respondent (5th Respondent in the court a quo) HLABISA MUNICIPALITY Sixth Respondent (6th Respondent in the court a quo) INGONYAMA TRUST Seventh Respondent (7th Respondent in the court a quo) EZEMVELO KZN WILDLIFE Eighth Respondent (8th Respondent in the court a quo) AMAFA EKWAZULU-NATAL HERITAGE COUNCIL Ninth Respondent (9th Respondent in the court a quo) CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS Amicus Curiae

This document consists of a practice note and heads of argument filed by Tendele Coal Mining (Pty) Ltd in the Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa. Tendele is responding to an appeal by the Global Environmental Trust and others who seek an interdict to close the Somkhele Coal Mine, alleging that the mine operates without necessary environmental, land use, waste management, and heritage authorizations.

• Tendele argues that the appellants' legal pleadings are fatally defective because they failed to identify specific 'listed activities' under the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) that were allegedly commenced without authorization, nor did they provide the dates such activities began.
• Tendele contends that its current mining operations in Area 1 and the extended Area 2 do not require NEMA environmental authorization because they commenced before the 'One Environmental System' was introduced on 8 December 2014, a period when environmental impacts were regulated exclusively through the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) via Environmental Management Programmes (EMPs).
• For proposed mining in Areas 4 and 5, Tendele asserts that environmental authorization is not required because the EMP was submitted on 9 May 2014, prior to 8 December 2014, and is thus governed by transitional provisions that apply the law as it existed before the One Environmental System.
• Tendele claims its operations do not breach the KwaZulu-Natal Planning and Development Act or the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (SPLUMA) because the mining on Reserve No. 3 began in 2006, predating these statutes, and is therefore a lawful historical land use.
• Regarding waste management, Tendele argues it does not need a waste management licence under the Waste Act because its activities were lawfully conducted under approved EMPs before the 29 November 2013 listing notice, and the Minister of Environmental Affairs has not since called upon the company to apply for one.
• Tendele admits to previously removing or altering traditional graves without the necessary authorizations from Amafa, but claims it did so with family consent and has established a comprehensive procedure with Amafa since April 2017 to prevent future unauthorized removals.
• Tendele emphasizes the socio-economic impact of a potential mine closure, stating it is the primary employer in the Mpukunyoni Area, employs over 1,000 people (83% of whom are local residents), and is the principal supplier of anthracite to South African ferrochrome producers.
• Between December 2006 and December 2016, Tendele reports spending R719 million on local community employee salaries, R54 million on community projects, and R300 million on services from community-based Black Economic Empowerment companies.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (2020). IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA SCA CASE NO: 1105/2019 KZP CASE NO: 11488/17P In the matter between: GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL TRUST First Appellant (1st Applicant in the court a quo) MFOLOZI COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ORGANISATION (2nd Applicant in the court a quo) SABELO DUMISANI DLADLA Third Appellant (3rd Applicant in the court a quo) and TENDELE COAL MINING (PTY) LTD First Respondent (1st Respondent in the court a quo) MINISTER OF MINERALS AND ENERGY Second Respondent (2 nd Respondent in the court a quo) MEC: DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TOURISM AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS Third Respondent (3rd Respondent in the court a quo) MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS Fourth Respondent (4th Respondent in the court a quo) MTUBATUBA MUNICIPALITY Fifth Respondent (5th Respondent in the court a quo) HLABISA MUNICIPALITY Sixth Respondent (6th Respondent in the court a quo) INGONYAMA TRUST Seventh Respondent (7th Respondent in the court a quo) EZEMVELO KZN WILDLIFE Eighth Respondent (8th Respondent in the court a quo) AMAFA EKWAZULU-NATAL HERITAGE COUNCIL Ninth Respondent (9th Respondent in the court a quo) CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS Amicus Curiae. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/08-06-2020-First-Respondents-HOA-and-Practice-note_GET_Tendele.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA SCA CASE NO: 1105/2019 KZP CASE NO: 11488/17P In the matter between: GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL TRUST First Appellant (1st Applicant in the court a quo) MFOLOZI COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ORGANISATION (2nd Applicant in the court a quo) SABELO DUMISANI DLADLA Third Appellant (3rd Applicant in the court a quo) and TENDELE COAL MINING (PTY) LTD First Respondent (1st Respondent in the court a quo) MINISTER OF MINERALS AND ENERGY Second Respondent (2 nd Respondent in the court a quo) MEC: DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TOURISM AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS Third Respondent (3rd Respondent in the court a quo) MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS Fourth Respondent (4th Respondent in the court a quo) MTUBATUBA MUNICIPALITY Fifth Respondent (5th Respondent in the court a quo) HLABISA MUNICIPALITY Sixth Respondent (6th Respondent in the court a quo) INGONYAMA TRUST Seventh Respondent (7th Respondent in the court a quo) EZEMVELO KZN WILDLIFE Eighth Respondent (8th Respondent in the court a quo) AMAFA EKWAZULU-NATAL HERITAGE COUNCIL Ninth Respondent (9th Respondent in the court a quo) CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS Amicus Curiae. 2020. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/08-06-2020-First-Respondents-HOA-and-Practice-note_GET_Tendele.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA SCA CASE NO: 1105/2019 KZP CASE NO: 11488/17P In the matter between: GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL TRUST First Appellant (1st Applicant in the court a quo) MFOLOZI COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ORGANISATION (2nd Applicant in the court a quo) SABELO DUMISANI DLADLA Third Appellant (3rd Applicant in the court a quo) and TENDELE COAL MINING (PTY) LTD First Respondent (1st Respondent in the court a quo) MINISTER OF MINERALS AND ENERGY Second Respondent (2 nd Respondent in the court a quo) MEC: DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TOURISM AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS Third Respondent (3rd Respondent in the court a quo) MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS Fourth Respondent (4th Respondent in the court a quo) MTUBATUBA MUNICIPALITY Fifth Respondent (5th Respondent in the court a quo) HLABISA MUNICIPALITY Sixth Respondent (6th Respondent in the court a quo) INGONYAMA TRUST Seventh Respondent (7th Respondent in the court a quo) EZEMVELO KZN WILDLIFE Eighth Respondent (8th Respondent in the court a quo) AMAFA EKWAZULU-NATAL HERITAGE COUNCIL Ninth Respondent (9th Respondent in the court a quo) CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS Amicus Curiae |date=8 June 2020 |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/08-06-2020-First-Respondents-HOA-and-Practice-note_GET_Tendele.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centreforenvironmentalrights2020supreme, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA SCA CASE NO: 1105/2019 KZP CASE NO: 11488/17P In the matter between: GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL TRUST First Appellant (1st Applicant in the court a quo) MFOLOZI COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ORGANISATION (2nd Applicant in the court a quo) SABELO DUMISANI DLADLA Third Appellant (3rd Applicant in the court a quo) and TENDELE COAL MINING (PTY) LTD First Respondent (1st Respondent in the court a quo) MINISTER OF MINERALS AND ENERGY Second Respondent (2 nd Respondent in the court a quo) MEC: DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TOURISM AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS Third Respondent (3rd Respondent in the court a quo) MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS Fourth Respondent (4th Respondent in the court a quo) MTUBATUBA MUNICIPALITY Fifth Respondent (5th Respondent in the court a quo) HLABISA MUNICIPALITY Sixth Respondent (6th Respondent in the court a quo) INGONYAMA TRUST Seventh Respondent (7th Respondent in the court a quo) EZEMVELO KZN WILDLIFE Eighth Respondent (8th Respondent in the court a quo) AMAFA EKWAZULU-NATAL HERITAGE COUNCIL Ninth Respondent (9th Respondent in the court a quo) CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS Amicus Curiae}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, year = {2020}, month = jun, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/08-06-2020-First-Respondents-HOA-and-Practice-note_GET_Tendele.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }