Search Climate Insights Directory

The Supreme Court of Appeal ruled that the former directors of Stilfontein Gold Mining Company (SGM) could not be held in contempt of court because the directives issued by the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry were too vague to be implemented. The court found the directives lacked clarity on the apportionment of costs, payment recipients, and deadlines. The commentary criticizes this judgment for ignoring the environmental risks of SGM's failure to pump and treat underground water, which creates conditions for acid mine drainage, and for failing to hold directors accountable despite their mass resignation prior to contempt proceedings.

The document analyzes the case of Harmony Gold Mining Company Limited v Free State, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, where the court ruled that the obligation to take 'reasonable measures' to prevent pollution under the National Water Act is not limited to a party's own land and can extend to land owned or used by others. This occurred in the context of managing groundwater and preventing acid mine drainage in the KOSH basin, where several mining companies were directed to share the costs of pumping and treating water at defunct mines to protect active operations.

The court found the Stilfontein Gold Mining Company (SGM) and its four directors guilty of contempt of court for ignoring directives to pump underground water to prevent pollution and flooding. The judge rejected the directors' defense that their mass resignation and the company's financial status absolved them of responsibility, emphasizing that directors cannot 'walk away' from environmental obligations. However, this contempt order was subsequently set aside on appeal in Kebble v The Minister of Water Affairs and Forestry 2007 JDR 0872 (SCA).