Winnie Madikizela-Mandela is taking her fight for the Qunu home of her ex-husband, former President Nelson Mandela to the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA).
Her attorney, Mvuzo Notyesi of Mvuzo Notyesi Inc, filed the petition to appeal against the Mthatha High Court’s decision to dismiss her application for the Qunu home to be given to her.
Notyesi filed the petition to appeal at the SCA on Friday in Bloemfontein.
Since it was revealed after Mandela died that he had bequeathed the sought after property to the Nelson Rholihlahla Mandela Family Trust for the benefit of the Mandela family, including his third wife Graca Machel and her children, Madikizela-Mandela has been fighting for it.
But she has been dealt one blow after another in her quest as the courts have been ruling against her.
Should the nine defendants decide to oppose the petition, as expected, they will have 30 days to file opposing affidavits to the application.
Notyesi will then reply to the opposing affidavits before the SCA can rule on whether or not to grant Madikizela-Mandela leave to appeal.
In court papers, the former first lady said the Mthatha High Court had erred when it dismissed her application with costs because she could not have known when she and Mandela divorced that the decision to dispose of the land had been taken.
“There were absolutely no substantial reasons put forward for the decision that I ought reasonably to have known of the minister’s decision when it was taken in 1997,” she said.
Madikizela-Mandela added that when dismissing her application, the court failed to deal with her contention that the minister of land affairs at the time “failed to demonstrate that he had the requisite power to make the disposal at issue”.
Yesterday Notyesi told the Daily Dispatch they had a strong case for the property which was why they were still pursuing the matter.
He said the matter was important not only for his client but for customary law in general.
“There would be a disruption in the whole society if this matter were not to be properly ventilated.
“For instance as we sit here, it would mean your home could be given to someone else in a will.
“The former president never paid for that land.
“He was just allotted it like any other member of that community, so it is inconceivable that he would now have a power to give it as if he were an owner in terms of the common law,” he said.
Notyesi said the argument that Mandela and his client had been divorced did not hold up.
“The fact of the matter is that Mrs Mandela was once married to the late president Mandela in terms of customary law and they acquired a property in customary land – that is an African land.
“So that land must devolve according to the law of the African people.
“That’s all our case is. We’ll go to the Constitutional Court if needs be for clarity on that point,” he said. — ndamasem@dispatch.co.za
Winnie escalates Qunu home claim to Supreme Court of Appeal hearing
Her attorney, Mvuzo Notyesi of Mvuzo Notyesi Inc, filed the petition to appeal against the Mthatha High Court’s decision to dismiss her application for the Qunu home to be given to her.
Notyesi filed the petition to appeal at the SCA on Friday in Bloemfontein.
Since it was revealed after Mandela died that he had bequeathed the sought after property to the Nelson Rholihlahla Mandela Family Trust for the benefit of the Mandela family, including his third wife Graca Machel and her children, Madikizela-Mandela has been fighting for it.
But she has been dealt one blow after another in her quest as the courts have been ruling against her.
Should the nine defendants decide to oppose the petition, as expected, they will have 30 days to file opposing affidavits to the application.
Notyesi will then reply to the opposing affidavits before the SCA can rule on whether or not to grant Madikizela-Mandela leave to appeal.
In court papers, the former first lady said the Mthatha High Court had erred when it dismissed her application with costs because she could not have known when she and Mandela divorced that the decision to dispose of the land had been taken.
“There were absolutely no substantial reasons put forward for the decision that I ought reasonably to have known of the minister’s decision when it was taken in 1997,” she said.
Madikizela-Mandela added that when dismissing her application, the court failed to deal with her contention that the minister of land affairs at the time “failed to demonstrate that he had the requisite power to make the disposal at issue”.
Yesterday Notyesi told the Daily Dispatch they had a strong case for the property which was why they were still pursuing the matter.
He said the matter was important not only for his client but for customary law in general.
“There would be a disruption in the whole society if this matter were not to be properly ventilated.
“For instance as we sit here, it would mean your home could be given to someone else in a will.
“The former president never paid for that land.
“He was just allotted it like any other member of that community, so it is inconceivable that he would now have a power to give it as if he were an owner in terms of the common law,” he said.
Notyesi said the argument that Mandela and his client had been divorced did not hold up.
“The fact of the matter is that Mrs Mandela was once married to the late president Mandela in terms of customary law and they acquired a property in customary land – that is an African land.
“So that land must devolve according to the law of the African people.
“That’s all our case is. We’ll go to the Constitutional Court if needs be for clarity on that point,” he said. — ndamasem@dispatch.co.za
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending Now
Latest Videos