APPELLANTS’ REBUTTAL HEADS OF ARGUMENT

This document contains the Appellants' Rebuttal Heads of Argument in a legal appeal involving the Endangered Wildlife Trust and the Federation for a Sustainable Environment against the Department of Water and Sanitation and Atha-Africa Ventures (Pty) Ltd. The briefing primarily addresses allegations made by Atha-Africa regarding conflicts of interest, abuse of legal process, and misleading arguments, while defending the role of the Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) as a public interest law organisation.

• The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) denies that its role as a public interest law organisation constitutes an unethical conflict of interest, arguing that alignment between a lawyer's beliefs and their client's interests is not a legal conflict.
• The appellants argue that a section 149 appeal under the National Water Act 36 of 1998 is an appeal in the 'ordinary strict sense' and includes the power of the court to determine if the law was properly applied to the facts.
• The appellants contend that the Water Tribunal failed to apply the precautionary principle despite significant scientific uncertainty regarding the mine's impacts, including the confidence level of the Delta-H groundwater model.
• The briefing asserts that the proposed mine will inevitably lead to the decant of contaminated water post-closure, which may include acid mine drainage (AMD), and that the current Water Use Licence (WUL) fails to provide for post-closure treatment.
• The appellants request a punitive costs order against Atha-Africa Ventures (Pty) Ltd, alleging that Atha's attacks on the integrity of the CER and its legal team were gratuitous and inconsistent with constitutional values of dignity and respect.

APA

Centre for Environmental Rights (n.d.). APPELLANTS’ REBUTTAL HEADS OF ARGUMENT. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/30102020-Appellants-Rebuttal-Heads-of-Argument.pdf?x21779

Chicago

Centre for Environmental Rights. APPELLANTS’ REBUTTAL HEADS OF ARGUMENT. n.d. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/30102020-Appellants-Rebuttal-Heads-of-Argument.pdf?x21779.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=APPELLANTS’ REBUTTAL HEADS OF ARGUMENT |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/30102020-Appellants-Rebuttal-Heads-of-Argument.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centreforenvironmentalrightsndappellants, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{APPELLANTS’ REBUTTAL HEADS OF ARGUMENT}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/30102020-Appellants-Rebuttal-Heads-of-Argument.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }