Browse all documents

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

This Applicants' Practice Note for Case No. 1322/2021 in the High Court of South Africa (Mpumalanga Division) outlines a legal application to review and set aside a decision by the MEC for Agriculture, Rural Development, Land and Environmental Affairs, Mpumalanga to exclude four properties from the Mabola Protected Environment.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The applicants are seeking the review and setting aside of a decision made by the first respondent (MEC for Agriculture, Rural Development, Land and Environmental Affairs, Mpumalanga) to exclude four properties from the Mabola Protected Environment, based on whether the decision was "unlawful, irrational or unreasonable".
  • Uthaka Energy (Pty) Ltd (the second respondent) is the only party opposing the application. The applicants note that the second respondent delivered its answering affidavit on 26 September 2022, which was both out of time and without an application for condonation, and has failed to deliver heads of argument.
  • The court is asked to decide several procedural and punitive matters, including whether to condone the late delivery of the second respondent's answering affidavit, whether specific paragraphs (14, 15, 17, 20, 44, 57, 114 and 178) of that affidavit should be struck out for being "irrelevant, vexatious and/or scandalous", and whether the second respondent should pay punitive costs.
  • The applicants have requested a hearing duration exceeding the allocated 45 minutes due to the "detailed factual and scientific background" of the case, proposing either a full day if the second respondent appears or three hours if they do not.

Cite the original document

APA
Centre for Environmental Rights (n.d.). APPLICANTS’ PRACTICE NOTE. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Applicants-Practice-Note.pdf?x21779
Chicago
Centre for Environmental Rights. APPLICANTS’ PRACTICE NOTE. n.d. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Applicants-Practice-Note.pdf?x21779.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=APPLICANTS’ PRACTICE NOTE |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Applicants-Practice-Note.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{centreforenvironmentalrightsndapplicants, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{APPLICANTS’ PRACTICE NOTE}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Applicants-Practice-Note.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated