The challenges that arise from the willing buyer, willing seller land redistribution practice have been thrown into the spotlight in a Constitutional Court case involving Newcastle subsistence farmers who are challenging the removal of their livestock from a farm in the area, says a report in The Mercury.

The subsistence farmers have been engaged in a long-standing battle with Normandien Farms over a portion of the Albany farm. The farmers, who have been recognised as labour tenants, want to acquire the portion they use, but this has been rejected by Normandien.

In turn, Normandien has argued that the land under the farmers’ use had been overgrazed and it had therefore secured an order for the animals to be removed from the property, which was confirmed by the SCA. Normandien removed the livestock, including cattle, goats and horses.

The matter has now come before the Constitutional Court, where the farmers are seeking leave to appeal against both the Land Claims Court and SCA orders.

In an affidavit, Bonginkosi Mathimbane, one of 12 applicants, argued that Normandien had blocked them from gaining ownership of a portion of Albany Estates. Willing to buy the land for the subsistence farmers, the government appointed Spectrum Valuation Services to conduct a valuation. Spectrum concluded that R8.53m was a fair and equitable amount for the successfully-claimed land.

Mathimbane said their stand-off with Normandien deepened after the group rejected the offer. ‘In turn, a counter-offer was made by Normandien of R400m without reliance on any sound or reasonable valuation basis,’ said Mathimbane.

However, in the SCA judgment it is mentioned that R400m referred to the entire estate of which Albany was part. Mathimbane and his co-applicants want the Constitutional Court to rule the lower courts ‘misdirected’ themselves. The case is set down for argument next year.

Full report in The Mercury (subscription needed)