The application of section 54 of the Mine, Health and Safety Act and reasonableness

Abstract

Health and safety issues in the mining sector are problematic. For many years the disregard of mine health and safety compliance led to fatal injuries and a rise in death tolls. Section 54 of the Mine Health and Safety Act 29 of 1996 (MHSA) was introduced to combat the death toll and injuries in the mining sector. The mine inspector needs to issue notices in terms of section 54 of the MHSA as an enforcement tool to ensure compliance with mine health and safety issues, but in the process may also halt mine operations if there is a reasonable believe that the risk would endanger the lives of mineworkers. The halting of mine operations has resulted in economic loss and job losses. There is a need for mine inspectors to apply their mind to the matter before issuing a section 54 order (also referred to as stoppage orders). In the unreported case of AngloGold Ashanti Limited v Xolile Mbonambi (Case number J2459/2016 of 04 November 2016), the court stressed the importance of reasonableness in decision-making in relation to a section 54 of the MHSA order. The aim of this study is to determine the content, criteria or yardstick of reasonableness that should be applied when a mine inspector makes a decision in terms of section 54 of the MHSA. The decision of the mine inspectors in relation to halting mine operations have been met with mixed views. Some view section 54 of the MHSA as a draconian enforcement tool affecting the economic aspect of the mines, whereas others view it as an important tool to combat fatal incidents in the mining industry.