Brümmer v Minister of Social Development and Others (10013/07) [2009] ZAWCHC 22 (16 March 2009)

Brümmer v Minister of Social Development and Others (10013/07) [2009] ZAWCHC 22 (16 March 2009)

The court found that the applicant's delay in filing the application was excessive and inadequately explained, and that condonation should not be granted. The respondents met the threshold for refusing access to information under section 39(1)(b)(iii)(ee) of PAIA, as disclosure could reasonably be expected to prejudice the fairness of the pending IT Lynx Consortium litigation. However, the court held that section 78(2) of PAIA, which requires applications to court within 30 days, constitutes an unreasonable and unjustifiable limitation on the right of access to court under section 34 of the Constitution. The 30-day period is grossly inadequate for ordinary litigants to overcome practical...

Citation
[2009] ZAWCHC 22
Parties
Applicant: Stefaans Conrad Brümmer; Respondent: Minister of Social Development; Respondent: Director-General of the Department of Social Development; Respondent: Minister of Justice & Constitutional Development
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
16 March 2009
Case Number
10013/07
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Merits and Constitutional Challenge
Outcome
Application for condonation and access to records dismissed; section 78(2) of PAIA declared unconstitutional; costs awarded as specified.
Judges
Zondi
Legal Topics
Promotion of Access to Information Act, Bill of Rights Limitation, Access to Court, Condonation, Constitutional Invalidity
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Promotion of Access to Information Act Bill of Rights Limitation Access to Court Condonation Constitutional Invalidity

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stefaans Conrad Brümmer

Applicant

Minister of Social Development

Respondent

Director-General of the Department of Social Development

Respondent

Minister of Justice & Constitutional Development

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Merits and Constitutional Challenge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's late filing should be condoned under section 78(2) of PAIA.
  2. 2 Whether the refusal of access to information by the first respondent was justified under section 39(1)(b)(iii)(ee) of PAIA.
  3. 3 Whether section 78(2) of PAIA, which imposes a 30-day time limit to approach court, is unconstitutional.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's delay in filing the application was excessive and inadequately explained, and that condonation should not be granted. The respondents met the threshold for refusing access to information under section 39(1)(b)(iii)(ee) of PAIA, as disclosure could reasonably be expected to prejudice the fairness of the pending IT Lynx Consortium litigation. However, the court held that section 78(2) of PAIA, which requires applications to court within 30 days, constitutes an unreasonable and unjustifiable limitation on the right of access to court under section 34 of the Constitution. The 30-day period is grossly inadequate for ordinary litigants to overcome practical...

Court Disposition

Application for condonation and access to records dismissed; section 78(2) of PAIA declared unconstitutional; costs awarded as specified.

Orders

  • The applicant's application for condonation and access to records is dismissed with costs.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the first and second respondents' costs, including costs consequent upon employment of two counsel.