IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
CC Case No: 41/2011 SCA Case No: 537/10 WCHC Case No: 25467/09
In the matter between:
JP MANDLAKAYISE JOHN HLOPHE Applicant
and
PREMIER OF THE WESTERN CAPE First Respondent
AND IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR THE JOINDER OF PARTIES REFERRED TO IN PARAGRAPH 1 OF THE NOTICE OF APPLICATION
______________________________________________________________
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION FOR THE JOINDER OF SECOND AND SIXTEENTH RESPONDENTS
_______________________________________________________________
I, the undersigned,
BARNABAS FANOZI XULU
make oath and say that:
Page 2
1. I am an adult male attorney of record in the litigation (with relevant representatives outside Cape Town) from the beginning of this litigation. It is appropriate for me to depose to this affidavit as I am duly authorised to do so.
2. Save where otherwise stated or where the converse appears from the context, the facts contained in this affidavit are within my personal knowledge and are true and correct. Where I make submissions of law, I do so on the advice of the Applicant’s other legal representatives.
NATURE OF THE APPLICATION
3. This is an application for the joinder of the following parties:
THE ACTING CHAIRPERSON: JUDICIAL SERVICE
COMMISSION Second Respondent
THE JUDICIAL SERVICE COMMISSION Third Respondent CHIEF JUSTICE SIRRAL SANDILE NGCOBO Fourth Respondent DEPUTY CHIEF JUSTICE DIKGANG MOSENEKE Fifth Respondent JUSTICE CHRISTOPHER NYAOLE JAFTA Sixth Respondent JUSTICE BAAITSE ELIZABETH NKABINDE Seventh Respondent JUSTICE THEMBILE LEWIS SKWEYIYA Eight Respondent JUSTICE JOHANN VINCENT VAN DER WESTHUIZEN Ninth Respondent JUSTICE ZAKERIA MOHAMMED YACOOB Tenth Respondent JUSTICE PIUS NKONZO LANGA Eleventh Respondent JUSTICE THOLAKELE HOPE MADALA Twelfth Respondent JUSTICE JENNIFER YVONNE MOKGORO Thirteenth Respondent JUSTICE CATHERINE MARY ELIZABETH O’REGAN Fourteenth Respondent JUSTICE ALBERT LOUIS SACHS Fifteenth Respondent
Page 3
JUSTICE FRANKLYN KROON Sixteenth Respondent
4. The Second and Third Respondents were the applicants in the proceedings before the Supreme Court of Appeal and the Fourth to Sixteenth Respondents were cited as the Respondents in the same proceedings above. I submit that these parties have a direct and substantial interest and should accordingly have been cited as parties to these proceedings.
5. When the application was prepared I believed that the joinder of the above parties was not necessary because the Second and Third Respondents are reported to have decided against appealing the decision of the Supreme Court of Appeal, while the Fourth to Sixteenth Respondents have not taken any part in any proceedings in the SCA or the court a quo. On further advice and reflection I have since been referred to the rule 5 and 29 of this Honourable Court and submit that the omission to cite these parties was erroneous. Given the substantial and direct interest that these parties may have in these proceedings and the fact that the First Respondent has not filed any answering papers, I respectfully say that there can be no prejudice to the parties so joined.
6. To the extent considered necessary, I submit that the failure to join
Page 4
these parties be condoned and order directing that they be joined is granted by this Honourable Court.
___________________________
BARNABAS FANOZI XULU I CERTIFY THAT the Deponent has acknowledged that he knows and understands the contents of this Affidavit which was signed and sworn to before me at on this day of 2011 under compliance with the Regulations contained in Government Notice No. R.1258 dated 21 July 1972 (as amended).
___________________________
COMMISSIONER OF OATHS.
FULL NAME ADDRESS AREA CAPACITY
