The ‘Thing’ Called ‘Mineral Right’ Re-examining the nature, content and scope of a rather confounding concept in South African law

The nature of a right to minerals is controversial in South Africa. With the recent coming into force of new legislation governing mineral resources, the conventional view is that there has been a drastic shift of control over the country’s mineral wealth from private individuals to the state. Howev...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Hanri Mostert
Format: Article
Language:deu
Published: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG 2015-01-01
Series:Recht in Afrika
Online Access:https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/10.5771/2363-6270_2014_1_28
id doaj-c85dca2642d54cf5b0345b4ccf733add
record_format Article
spelling doaj-c85dca2642d54cf5b0345b4ccf733add2020-11-25T01:02:30ZdeuNomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KGRecht in Afrika2363-62702015-01-01171285110.5771/2363-6270_2014_1_28105771236362702014128The ‘Thing’ Called ‘Mineral Right’ Re-examining the nature, content and scope of a rather confounding concept in South African lawHanri MostertThe nature of a right to minerals is controversial in South Africa. With the recent coming into force of new legislation governing mineral resources, the conventional view is that there has been a drastic shift of control over the country’s mineral wealth from private individuals to the state. However, in this article, the author explains that the conceptualisation of the mineral right in South Africa has always been inconsistent and contested, at least partly due to South Africa being a mixed legal system with conflicting theoretical foundations. With reference to Underkuffler’s theoretical framework of the legitimate regulatory powers of the state over property, the author demonstrates that the orthodox view in South Africa has historically emphasised the powers of private parties over mineral resources and viewed the state’s legitimate regulatory role as limited. However, the author argues, both historically and conceptually it is more accurate to acknowledge that the state has always exercised significant control over mining in South Africa, and the right to minerals has always been a flexible one which has varied across different legislative periods. The article outlines the evolution of the mineral right in South Africa, discusses the conflicting theoretical conceptions of the right (including whether it is servitudal in nature or an independent property right) and critiques the recent judicial treatment of the right by South Africa’s highest courts. The author concludes by suggesting that if the mineral right is understood correctly, the recent legislative changes are actually far less radical than commonly thought.https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/10.5771/2363-6270_2014_1_28
collection DOAJ
language deu
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Hanri Mostert
spellingShingle Hanri Mostert
The ‘Thing’ Called ‘Mineral Right’ Re-examining the nature, content and scope of a rather confounding concept in South African law
Recht in Afrika
author_facet Hanri Mostert
author_sort Hanri Mostert
title The ‘Thing’ Called ‘Mineral Right’ Re-examining the nature, content and scope of a rather confounding concept in South African law
title_short The ‘Thing’ Called ‘Mineral Right’ Re-examining the nature, content and scope of a rather confounding concept in South African law
title_full The ‘Thing’ Called ‘Mineral Right’ Re-examining the nature, content and scope of a rather confounding concept in South African law
title_fullStr The ‘Thing’ Called ‘Mineral Right’ Re-examining the nature, content and scope of a rather confounding concept in South African law
title_full_unstemmed The ‘Thing’ Called ‘Mineral Right’ Re-examining the nature, content and scope of a rather confounding concept in South African law
title_sort ‘thing’ called ‘mineral right’ re-examining the nature, content and scope of a rather confounding concept in south african law
publisher Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG
series Recht in Afrika
issn 2363-6270
publishDate 2015-01-01
description The nature of a right to minerals is controversial in South Africa. With the recent coming into force of new legislation governing mineral resources, the conventional view is that there has been a drastic shift of control over the country’s mineral wealth from private individuals to the state. However, in this article, the author explains that the conceptualisation of the mineral right in South Africa has always been inconsistent and contested, at least partly due to South Africa being a mixed legal system with conflicting theoretical foundations. With reference to Underkuffler’s theoretical framework of the legitimate regulatory powers of the state over property, the author demonstrates that the orthodox view in South Africa has historically emphasised the powers of private parties over mineral resources and viewed the state’s legitimate regulatory role as limited. However, the author argues, both historically and conceptually it is more accurate to acknowledge that the state has always exercised significant control over mining in South Africa, and the right to minerals has always been a flexible one which has varied across different legislative periods. The article outlines the evolution of the mineral right in South Africa, discusses the conflicting theoretical conceptions of the right (including whether it is servitudal in nature or an independent property right) and critiques the recent judicial treatment of the right by South Africa’s highest courts. The author concludes by suggesting that if the mineral right is understood correctly, the recent legislative changes are actually far less radical than commonly thought.
url https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/10.5771/2363-6270_2014_1_28
work_keys_str_mv AT hanrimostert thethingcalledmineralrightreexaminingthenaturecontentandscopeofaratherconfoundingconceptinsouthafricanlaw
AT hanrimostert thingcalledmineralrightreexaminingthenaturecontentandscopeofaratherconfoundingconceptinsouthafricanlaw
_version_ 1725204585714286592