UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA (UNISA)
College of Law
⋄
LCP4805 ENVIRONMENTAL LAW
Semester 1 Assignment 01 – 2026
⋄
Module Code: LCP4805
Module Name: Environmental Law
Student Name: [Insert Student Name]
Student Number: [Insert Student Number]
Assignment No.: 01
Due Date: 20 March 2026
Semester: Semester 1, 2026
Unique Number: 281570
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for LCP4805 Environmental Law
at the University of South Africa.
,UNISA | LCP4805 Environmental Law – Assignment 1
Contents
1 Question 1: Climate Change and Section 24O of NEMA 4
1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2 The Text of Section 24O and What “All Relevant Factors” Means . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3 Constitutional Interpretation: Section 24 and Section 39(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.4 Case Law Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.5 The Role of Sustainable Development and Intergenerational Equity . . . . . . . . 6
1.6 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2 Question 2: Six Categories of Persons in the Public Participation Process 8
2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2 The Six Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3 Question 3: Shell and the Wild Coast – Did Shell Fulfil the Public Participation Require-
ments? 10
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.2 Applicable Environmental Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.3 What Shell Actually Did – and Why the Court Found It Insufficient . . . . . . . . 11
3.4 Indigenous Rights and the Additional Dimension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4 Question 2.1: Soft Law and International Environmental Law – Do I Agree with Dugard? 14
4.1 The Proposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.2 What is Soft Law? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.3 Why Soft Law Dominates Environmental Law More Than Other Fields . . . . . . 14
4.4 A Modest Qualification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Page 1 of 39
,UNISA | LCP4805 Environmental Law – Assignment 1
4.5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5 Question 2.2: Critical Overview of the Development of International Environmental Law 17
5.1 The Pre-Stockholm Era (Before 1972) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.2 The Stockholm Era (1972) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.3 The Brundtland Commission and the Rio Era (1987–1992) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.4 Post-Rio Developments: Kyoto to Paris (1997–2015) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.5 Critical Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6 Question 3.1: Did the EIA Achieve Integrated Environmental Management Under Section
23 of NEMA? (Better Future Bridge Scenario) 20
6.1 Section 23 of NEMA: What Integrated Environmental Management Requires . . 20
6.2 Application to the Better Future (Pty) Ltd Scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
6.3 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
7 Question 3.2: The Importance of Access to Information in Environmental Matters 22
7.1 The Constitutional Foundation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
7.2 Why Access to Information Matters in Environmental Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
7.3 Application to Better Future Scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
8 Question 3.3: Cooperative Governance and the Coordination of Environmental Functions 25
8.1 South Africa’s Three-Sphere System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
8.2 Why Cooperative Governance is Necessary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
8.3 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
9 Question 2.1 (Acid Mine Drainage): The Polluter Pays Principle 27
9.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
9.2 What the Polluter Pays Principle Entails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Page 2 of 39
, UNISA | LCP4805 Environmental Law – Assignment 1
10 Question 2.2 (Acid Mine Drainage): Inter- and Intra-Generational Equity 29
10.1 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
10.2 Context in Environmental Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
11 Question 2.3 and 2.4: Compliance Notices and Consequences of Non-Compliance 31
11.1 When Can an Environmental Management Inspector Issue a Compliance Notice? 31
11.2 Consequences of Failure to Comply with a Compliance Notice . . . . . . . . . . 31
12 Question 3.1: Five Environmental Management Principles in NEMA 32
13 Question 3.2: Purpose of Environmental Management Principles in NEMA 33
13.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
13.2 The Purpose of the Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
13.3 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Table of Cases 36
Table of Legislation 37
Bibliography 38
Page 3 of 39
College of Law
⋄
LCP4805 ENVIRONMENTAL LAW
Semester 1 Assignment 01 – 2026
⋄
Module Code: LCP4805
Module Name: Environmental Law
Student Name: [Insert Student Name]
Student Number: [Insert Student Number]
Assignment No.: 01
Due Date: 20 March 2026
Semester: Semester 1, 2026
Unique Number: 281570
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for LCP4805 Environmental Law
at the University of South Africa.
,UNISA | LCP4805 Environmental Law – Assignment 1
Contents
1 Question 1: Climate Change and Section 24O of NEMA 4
1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2 The Text of Section 24O and What “All Relevant Factors” Means . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3 Constitutional Interpretation: Section 24 and Section 39(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.4 Case Law Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.5 The Role of Sustainable Development and Intergenerational Equity . . . . . . . . 6
1.6 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2 Question 2: Six Categories of Persons in the Public Participation Process 8
2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2 The Six Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3 Question 3: Shell and the Wild Coast – Did Shell Fulfil the Public Participation Require-
ments? 10
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.2 Applicable Environmental Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.3 What Shell Actually Did – and Why the Court Found It Insufficient . . . . . . . . 11
3.4 Indigenous Rights and the Additional Dimension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4 Question 2.1: Soft Law and International Environmental Law – Do I Agree with Dugard? 14
4.1 The Proposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.2 What is Soft Law? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.3 Why Soft Law Dominates Environmental Law More Than Other Fields . . . . . . 14
4.4 A Modest Qualification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Page 1 of 39
,UNISA | LCP4805 Environmental Law – Assignment 1
4.5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5 Question 2.2: Critical Overview of the Development of International Environmental Law 17
5.1 The Pre-Stockholm Era (Before 1972) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.2 The Stockholm Era (1972) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.3 The Brundtland Commission and the Rio Era (1987–1992) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.4 Post-Rio Developments: Kyoto to Paris (1997–2015) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.5 Critical Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6 Question 3.1: Did the EIA Achieve Integrated Environmental Management Under Section
23 of NEMA? (Better Future Bridge Scenario) 20
6.1 Section 23 of NEMA: What Integrated Environmental Management Requires . . 20
6.2 Application to the Better Future (Pty) Ltd Scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
6.3 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
7 Question 3.2: The Importance of Access to Information in Environmental Matters 22
7.1 The Constitutional Foundation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
7.2 Why Access to Information Matters in Environmental Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
7.3 Application to Better Future Scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
8 Question 3.3: Cooperative Governance and the Coordination of Environmental Functions 25
8.1 South Africa’s Three-Sphere System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
8.2 Why Cooperative Governance is Necessary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
8.3 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
9 Question 2.1 (Acid Mine Drainage): The Polluter Pays Principle 27
9.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
9.2 What the Polluter Pays Principle Entails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Page 2 of 39
, UNISA | LCP4805 Environmental Law – Assignment 1
10 Question 2.2 (Acid Mine Drainage): Inter- and Intra-Generational Equity 29
10.1 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
10.2 Context in Environmental Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
11 Question 2.3 and 2.4: Compliance Notices and Consequences of Non-Compliance 31
11.1 When Can an Environmental Management Inspector Issue a Compliance Notice? 31
11.2 Consequences of Failure to Comply with a Compliance Notice . . . . . . . . . . 31
12 Question 3.1: Five Environmental Management Principles in NEMA 32
13 Question 3.2: Purpose of Environmental Management Principles in NEMA 33
13.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
13.2 The Purpose of the Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
13.3 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Table of Cases 36
Table of Legislation 37
Bibliography 38
Page 3 of 39
