Black Insurance Advisors Council v City of Tswane Metropolitan Municipality (36780/2022) [2023] ZAGPPHC 10 (16 January 2023)
The court found that the respondent's refusal to suspend the tender process for medical aid brokerage services pending the outcome of the review application and the amendment of Circular 20 of 2010 directly affected the rights of the applicant's members and the respondent's employees. The respondent failed to engage with the applicant or provide substantive reasons for its refusal, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness. The applicant established a prima facie right to challenge the tender specifications and demonstrated that irreparable harm would result if the interim interdict was not granted, as thousands of contracts could be terminated. The...
- Citation
- [2023] ZAGPPHC 10
- Parties
- Applicant: Black Insurance Advisors Council; Respondent: City of Tswane Metropolitan Municipality
- Court
- North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 16 January 2023
- Case Number
- 36780/2022
- Procedural Posture
- Urgent Application / Interim Interdict Pending Review
- Outcome
- Interim interdict granted in favour of the applicant, restraining the respondent from proceeding with the tender process pending the outcome of the review application or amendment of Circular 20 of 2010.
- Judges
- Sardiwalla
- Legal Topics
- Interim Interdict, Procedural Fairness, Audi Alteram Partem, Municipal Tender Process, Medical Schemes Act, Natural Justice
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Black Insurance Advisors Council
Applicant
City of Tswane Metropolitan Municipality
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interim Interdict Pending Review
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondent is entitled to appoint a broker for its employees for medical aid purposes.
- 2 Whether the respondent's refusal to suspend the tender process pending review violates the applicant's and its members' rights to procedural fairness and natural justice.
- 3 Whether the requirements for an interim interdict are satisfied in the circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the respondent's refusal to suspend the tender process for medical aid brokerage services pending the outcome of the review application and the amendment of Circular 20 of 2010 directly affected the rights of the applicant's members and the respondent's employees. The respondent failed to engage with the applicant or provide substantive reasons for its refusal, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness. The applicant established a prima facie right to challenge the tender specifications and demonstrated that irreparable harm would result if the interim interdict was not granted, as thousands of contracts could be terminated. The...
Court Disposition
Interim interdict granted in favour of the applicant, restraining the respondent from proceeding with the tender process pending the outcome of the review application or amendment of Circular 20 of 2010.
Orders
- Non-compliance with the rules of court is condoned; the application is heard on an urgent basis.
- The respondent is interdicted and restrained from accepting bids/tenders for medical aid brokerage services under tender number GHCM 03-2022.23 for three years.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment