The South African Constitutional Court upheld an appeal by thirteen families of the Lesetlheng community who had been facing mining-induced eviction from land they purchased a century ago that had remained in trust for them due to racially discriminatory laws forbidding them from owning it. The Court held that the mining companies had failed to consult, negotiate with, and seek the consent of the informal land rights holders, as required by law. 

The Lesetlheng community is a subset of the larger Bakgatla-Ba-Kgafela community. The Lesetlheng communities’ ancestors purchased the farm in question in 1919, but owing to the racially discriminatory laws at the time, the ownership of the farm could not be transferred to the Lesetlheng community. Instead, the title deed stated that the property was held in trust by the state on behalf of the entire Bakgatla-Ba-Kgafela community.

Post-apartheid, the South Africa constitution attempted to rectify the impacts of discriminatory land laws. Section 25(6) of the constitution states, "a person or community whose tenure of land is legally insecure as a result of past racially discriminatory laws or practices is entitled, to the extent provided by an Act of Parliament, either to tenure which is legally secure or to comparable redress." The 1996 Interim Protection of Informal Land Rights Act (IPILRA), enacted to implement that constitutional provision, defines informal rights to land and, in § 2, provides that "no person may be deprived of any informal right to land without his or her consent." The Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) vests control of all mineral and petroleum resources in the South African government, which is responsible for granting mining rights. However, the MPRDA requires a mining rights holder to consult with those possessing surface rights to the land before mining activities may commence.

The Court upheld the community’s appeal and vacated the eviction order.