African National Congress and Others v Lobelo and Others (UM81/2021) [2021] ZANWHC 52 (26 August 2021)

African National Congress and Others v Lobelo and Others (UM81/2021) [2021] ZANWHC 52 (26 August 2021)

The court found that the respondents, in removing the applicants from their positions as councillors, acted without legal authority, as the power to remove councillors for breach of the Code of Conduct is reserved for the MEC under the Municipal Systems Act. The respondents failed to follow due process and did not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] ZANWHC 52
Parties
Applicant: African National Congress; Applicant: Modisaotsile Sam Letlakane; Applicant: Elisa Sedimoeng; Applicant: Joseph Olaotsoe Makalela; Applicant: Nkagisang Joseph Molefabangwe; Applicant: Thebeetsile Abram Modise; Applicant: Lebogang Bome; Applicant: Puseletso Merriam Mokoto; Applicant: Abram Thembinkosi Mabovu; Applicant: Boorman Phutiyagae; Respondent: Mpulelo Eunice Lobelo; Respondent: Mbuyiselo Eric Booi; Respondent: Tumelo David Mthimkhulu; Respondent: Matshediso Margaret Moreo; Respondent: Gabahele Elsie Kgasu; Respondent: Keatlaretse Evelyn Blou; Respondent: Rebecca Baitsumedu; Respondent: Thero Silas Tsholo; Respondent: Thabo Albert Morei; Respondent: Tickey Elizabeth Chabanku; Respondent: The Mayor, Dimakatso Lydia Malwane; Respondent: Monto Isak Moruti (Municipal Manager); Respondent: The Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 August 2021
Case Number
UM81/2021
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Judgment After Urgent Application
Outcome
Application granted; respondents' decision to remove applicants from council declared unlawful and set aside.
Judges
M Z Makoti
Legal Topics
Municipal Councillor Removal, Natural Justice, Ultra Vires, Urgency in Applications, Code of Conduct for Councillors, Legality Principle
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Land and Property Municipal Councillor Removal Natural Justice Ultra Vires Urgency in Applications Code of Conduct for Councillors +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

African National Congress

Applicant

Modisaotsile Sam Letlakane

Applicant

Elisa Sedimoeng

Applicant

Joseph Olaotsoe Makalela

Applicant

Nkagisang Joseph Molefabangwe

Applicant

Thebeetsile Abram Modise

Applicant

Lebogang Bome

Applicant

Puseletso Merriam Mokoto

Applicant

Abram Thembinkosi Mabovu

Applicant

Boorman Phutiyagae

Applicant

Mpulelo Eunice Lobelo

Respondent

Mbuyiselo Eric Booi

Respondent

Tumelo David Mthimkhulu

Respondent

Matshediso Margaret Moreo

Respondent

Gabahele Elsie Kgasu

Respondent

Keatlaretse Evelyn Blou

Respondent

Rebecca Baitsumedu

Respondent

Thero Silas Tsholo

Respondent

Thabo Albert Morei

Respondent

Tickey Elizabeth Chabanku

Respondent

The Mayor, Dimakatso Lydia Malwane

Respondent

Monto Isak Moruti (Municipal Manager)

Respondent

The Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Judgment After Urgent Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants' removal from council positions was lawful and procedurally fair.
  2. 2 Whether the respondents had authority to remove councillors or if such power resides exclusively with the MEC.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants were afforded natural justice before removal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondents, in removing the applicants from their positions as councillors, acted without legal authority, as the power to remove councillors for breach of the Code of Conduct is reserved for the MEC under the Municipal Systems Act. The respondents failed to follow due process and did not afford the applicants an opportunity to be heard, violating the principles of natural justice. The technical objections raised by the respondents, including lack of authority, improper commissioning of affidavits, non-joinder, and urgency, were dismissed as lacking merit. The urgency was justified by the immediate and ongoing prejudice to the applicants. The respondents' actions...

Court Disposition

Application granted; respondents' decision to remove applicants from council declared unlawful and set aside.

Orders

  • The resolution removing the applicants from council is declared unlawful and set aside.
  • The applicants are reinstated to their positions as councillors of Tswaing Local Municipality.