Alfdav Construction CC v MEC for Roads and Public Works and Others (3087/2016) [2016] ZAECPEHC 75 (13 December 2016)

Alfdav Construction CC v MEC for Roads and Public Works and Others (3087/2016) [2016] ZAECPEHC 75 (13 December 2016)

The court found that the applicant had not submitted a B-BBEE certificate with its tender and was therefore correctly awarded zero preference points. The applicant was aware of this outcome from the opening of tenders and did not raise any objection at the time. The argument that the respondents' failure to provide...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] ZAECPEHC 75
Parties
Applicant: Alfdav Construction CC; Respondent: MEC for Roads and Public Works; Respondent: HOD: Department of Roads and Public Works; Respondent: Department of Roads and Public Works; Respondent: Blue Disa Trading 754 CC Joint Venture; Respondent: Edge to Edge 1275 CC; Respondent: Nepa Projects Joint Venture; Respondent: Express Builders CC; Respondent: GVK Siyazama Building Contractors (EP) (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Reity Trading Enterprise Joint Venture; Respondent: Breetzke Smith Paxton Construction (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: MEC for Education
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 December 2016
Case Number
3087/2016
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Costs Determination After Abandonment of Substantive Relief
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
NW Gqamana
Legal Topics
Public Procurement, Tender Review, Costs Award, Bbbee Preference Points
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Public Procurement Tender Review Costs Award Bbbee Preference Points

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alfdav Construction CC

Applicant

MEC for Roads and Public Works

Respondent

HOD: Department of Roads and Public Works

Respondent

Department of Roads and Public Works

Respondent

Blue Disa Trading 754 CC Joint Venture

Respondent

Edge to Edge 1275 CC

Respondent

Nepa Projects Joint Venture

Respondent

Express Builders CC

Respondent

GVK Siyazama Building Contractors (EP) (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Reity Trading Enterprise Joint Venture

Respondent

Breetzke Smith Paxton Construction (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

MEC for Education

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Costs Determination After Abandonment of Substantive Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was entitled to preference points for B-BBEE in the tender process.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant submitted a valid B-BBEE certificate with its tender.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents acted unreasonably or caused unnecessary litigation justifying a costs order against them.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had not submitted a B-BBEE certificate with its tender and was therefore correctly awarded zero preference points. The applicant was aware of this outcome from the opening of tenders and did not raise any objection at the time. The argument that the respondents' failure to provide information necessitated the application was not supported by the applicant's pleadings or conduct, as the applicant persisted with its application even after receiving the requested information. The court held that the application was without merit from the outset and that the applicant failed to prove any substantial right or entitlement to relief. There was no unreasonable...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.