The Founding Affidavit

Excerpt from the “Founding Affidavit”

6. This application concerns two different portions of land, which for the sake of convenience are referred to as the “BCR Land” and the “RSE Land”,
being the land affected by the two settlement agreements referred to as CPA 2 and CPA 3 in the Notice of Motion. The agreements are paginated
as part of the annexure bundle, from pages AF 201-213 and AF 214-240.

7. The respondents affected by the order requested in paragraph 1 of the Notice of Motion in respect of the BCR Land are the 1st to 3rd respondents,
whilst those affected by the order requested in paragraph 2 of the Notice of Motion in respect of the RSE Land are the 4th to 6th respondents.

8. The setting aside of both settlement agreements is sought in the same application for the sake of convenience and saving unnecessary costs. The
same facts on some material issues apply to the determination of both, despite other differences. The material facts and issues which are common
to both include:

8.1 The reasons for the formation of the ZDCPA;

8.2. The submission in terms of Section 42D of the Restitution of Land Rights Act 1994 for settlement of portion of the land claims. The same
document recommended the settlement of both;

8.3. The approval of the two settlements by the Minister, in the same document;

8.4. The meeting where the settlements (both of them) were explained to the community and where the resolutions were passed which are relied on as the community authorization for the conclusion of the settlements. Applicant contends that there was no proper authority. If this contention is upheld both settlements will fail on the same basis and on the same facts.

Download the Full Document Here