10x90 mm aluminium irrigation pipes; 66x75 mm aluminium irrigation pipes 2x centrifugal pumps, serial No. VEG 106 and W.A. 3420; 6 disc plough, serial number. 7-1180; 10 disc harrow, serial number. 92-102; 1x suction valve with pipe; 31 fertiliser bags. Of these items it was common cause that the trailer and the six disc plough were property of the Mahenene Research Station and thus of the Government. As I understood the evidence, the ten disc harrow referred to also fell within this category, as was also accepted by the plaintiff. As far as the other items are concerned, the plaintiff did not in my view establish ownership of the John Deere tractor engine. On the contrary, it would seem that this engine was also government property and had been taken from the tractor at the Mahenene (Government) Research Station and was identified as such by Mr Alfred on behalf of the defendant. The plaintiff also acknowledged that he did not own a tractor and said that the engine was built from parts acquired over several years but could not provide any proof or details concerning the purchase of any such part. As far as the Lister pump is concerned, it would seem that this item was the property of the research station and that the plaintiff would likewise not establish his ownership thereof. As for the two centrifugal pumps, the evidence concerning them plaintiff’s was confusing. He could not provide proof of ownership. On the other hand, there was evidence that these belonged to Namwater. There remains the two different sizes of irrigation pipes and the bags of fertiliser. The evidence before me was that the fertiliser bags had insignia upon them which would indicate that they form part of some exchange between the government and an external aid giver. While the plaintiff stated that he had cquired the fertiliser in the normal course, he did not explain how he came into possession of those items with the insignia on them even though he was not
10x90 mm aluminium irrigation pipes; 66x75 mm aluminium irrigation pipes 2x centrifugal pumps, serial No. VEG 106 and W.A. 3420; 6 disc plough, serial number. 7-1180; 10 disc harrow, serial number. 92-102; 1x suction valve with pipe; 31 fertiliser bags. Of these items it was common cause that the trailer and the six disc plough were property of the Mahenene Research Station and thus of the Government. As I understood the evidence, the ten disc harrow referred to also fell within this category, as was also accepted by the plaintiff. As far as the other items are concerned, the plaintiff did not in my view establish ownership of the John Deere tractor engine. On the contrary, it would seem that this engine was also government property and had been taken from the tractor at the Mahenene (Government) Research Station and was identified as such by Mr Alfred on behalf of the defendant. The plaintiff also acknowledged that he did not own a tractor and said that the engine was built from parts acquired over several years but could not provide any proof or details concerning the purchase of any such part. As far as the Lister pump is concerned, it would seem that this item was the property of the research station and that the plaintiff would likewise not establish his ownership thereof. As for the two centrifugal pumps, the plaintiff’s evidence concerning them was confusing. He could not provide proof of ownership. On the other hand, there was evidence that these belonged to Namwater. There remains the two different sizes of irrigation pipes and the bags of fertiliser. The evidence before me was that the fertiliser bags had insignia upon them which would indicate that they form part of some exchange between the government and an external aid giver. While the plaintiff stated that he had cquired the fertiliser in the normal course, he did not explain how he came into possession of those items with the insignia on them even though he was not
Prins%20v%20The%20Government%20of%20the%20Republic%20of%20Namibia%20(I%201361-2004)%20[2013]%20NAHCMD%20259%20(2013).docx