The High Court decision, however, does not mean the farmers can immediately sue Zimbabwe for compensation for the loss of their land. Only one part of Thursday’s ruling may have a monetary effect.

“It’s the part that deals with legal costs incurred by the farmers to bring the SADC proceedings. And that is not a huge amount…about $30,000. And that amount can now be claimed from the Zimbabwean government through South African legal procedures. And if the Zimbabwean government does not pay those costs it would enable us to attach Zimbabwean assets in South Africa,” he says.

Such a move could serve as a model for claiming compensation in the future. First, though, the farmers must go back to the SADC tribunal to try to win a ruling that they are indeed owed compensation.

“If we are successful with this little amount of $30,000, which represents the legal costs, then we could use a similar process to also enforce more substantial amounts that apply to the actual damages that the farmers have suffered. And that is what we’ve got in mind,” he says.

The original SADC tribunal ruling affected about 80 people, Spies says. But the case could have much wider implications. Overall, approximately 3,000 white farmers were affected by the land reform. He also says there are about 400 South African citizens who had owned land in Zimbabwe that was seized.