Bearing v Industrial Supplies CC (26276/01) [2002] ZAGPHC 20 (17 April 2002)

Bearing v Industrial Supplies CC (26276/01) [2002] ZAGPHC 20 (17 April 2002)

The court held that the respondent's removal of the applicant from its vendors list was a commercial decision made by a private entity and did not constitute administrative action as contemplated by section 33 of the Constitution. The respondent was not exercising public power or performing a public duty, but rather acting within its contractual and common law rights. The applicant was not entitled to procedural fairness or written reasons under administrative law. The court relied on the precedent set in Cape Metropolitan Council v Metro Inspection Services, which distinguished between public administrative action and private contractual decisions. The application was accordingly dismissed.

Citation
[2002] ZAGPHC 20
Parties
Applicant: I W Bearing; Respondent: Industrial Supplies CC
Court
High Courts - Gauteng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 April 2002
Case Number
26276/01
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Willis
Legal Topics
Administrative Action Definition, Bill of Rights Limitation, Removal From Vendors List, Contractual Cancellation
Administrative Law Commercial and Corporate Administrative Action Definition Bill of Rights Limitation Removal From Vendors List Contractual Cancellation

Case Brief

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

I W Bearing

Applicant

Industrial Supplies CC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's removal of the applicant from its vendors list constituted administrative action under section 33 of the Constitution.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was entitled to procedural fairness and written reasons for removal from the vendors list.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent, as a private commercial entity, was subject to administrative law obligations in its dealings with the applicant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the respondent's removal of the applicant from its vendors list was a commercial decision made by a private entity and did not constitute administrative action as contemplated by section 33 of the Constitution. The respondent was not exercising public power or performing a public duty, but rather acting within its contractual and common law rights. The applicant was not entitled to procedural fairness or written reasons under administrative law. The court relied on the precedent set in Cape Metropolitan Council v Metro Inspection Services, which distinguished between public administrative action and private contractual decisions. The application was accordingly dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.