Samancor Chrome Limited was granted a prospecting right under the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act 28 of 2002 (MPRDA) over specified portions of the farm Tweelaagte 175 JP in the North West Province. The written description of the prospecting area erroneously referred to subdivisions (portions 7, 8 and 9) that did not legally exist, although the attached survey plan (Annexure B) accurately depicted the prospecting area by coordinates. Samancor discovered that North West Chrome Mining (Pty) Ltd and Monageng Family Mining Services (Pty) Ltd were conducting mining activities within the area covered by Samancor’s prospecting right. The respondents relied on mining permits issued in 2010, which were limited to small areas that did not overlap with Samancor’s prospecting area. Samancor brought an urgent application in the High Court for interdictory relief to stop the alleged unlawful mining. The High Court dismissed the application, questioning the validity of Samancor’s prospecting right, holding that the Minister of Mineral Resources should have been joined, and finding the application premature due to a pending section 47 MPRDA process. Samancor sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA).
Leave to appeal was granted; the appeal was upheld with costs. The High Court’s order was set aside and replaced with an order interdicting the first and second respondents from conducting mining activities, entering, or interfering with Samancor’s prospecting area; directing them to vacate the area within 15 days; and authorising the Sheriff, with police assistance if necessary, to enforce the order. The application to introduce further evidence on appeal was refused.
The case clarifies that courts should not determine the validity of mining or prospecting rights in interdict proceedings where such validity is not directly challenged. It affirms that minor errors in the textual description of a prospecting area do not invalidate a right where the area is objectively determinable from approved plans. The judgment also confirms that section 47 MPRDA processes do not preclude urgent interdictory relief against unlawful mining and provides guidance on when joinder of the Minister of Mineral Resources is required.