Directory Solutions CC v TDS Directory Operations (Pty) Ltd and Others (1936/07) [2008] ZAECHC 22 (4 April 2008)

Directory Solutions CC v TDS Directory Operations (Pty) Ltd and Others (1936/07) [2008] ZAECHC 22 (4 April 2008)

The court held that the applicant's case was premised on the conduct of the first respondent constituting administrative action subject to judicial review under PAJA. However, the application was not brought within the 180-day period prescribed by section 7(1) of PAJA, as the relevant decision was communicated to the applicant in June 2006, but the application was only launched in September 2007. The applicant failed to properly seek condonation or provide a factual basis for such relief. Furthermore, the applicant did not exhaust available internal remedies, specifically the complaint procedure before ICASA, as required by section 7(2) of PAJA. No exceptional circumstances were shown to...

Citation
[2008] ZAECHC 22
Parties
Applicant: Directory Solutions CC; Respondent: TDS Directory Operations (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Telkom South Africa Limited; Respondent: Minister of Communications; Respondent: Independent Communications Authority of South Africa
Court
High Courts - Eastern Cape
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 April 2008
Case Number
1936/07
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
J C H Jansen
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Exhaustion of Internal Remedies, Licensing Conditions, Judicial Review, Unfair Discrimination
Administrative Law Telecoms and Media Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Exhaustion of Internal Remedies Licensing Conditions Judicial Review Unfair Discrimination

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Directory Solutions CC

Applicant

TDS Directory Operations (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Telkom South Africa Limited

Respondent

Minister of Communications

Respondent

Independent Communications Authority of South Africa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conduct of the first respondent in refusing to accept and publish directory entry requests from consumers via the applicant constitutes administrative action subject to judicial review under PAJA.
  2. 2 Whether the application was brought within the prescribed time period under section 7(1) of PAJA.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was required to exhaust internal remedies before approaching the court, as per section 7(2) of PAJA.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicant's case was premised on the conduct of the first respondent constituting administrative action subject to judicial review under PAJA. However, the application was not brought within the 180-day period prescribed by section 7(1) of PAJA, as the relevant decision was communicated to the applicant in June 2006, but the application was only launched in September 2007. The applicant failed to properly seek condonation or provide a factual basis for such relief. Furthermore, the applicant did not exhaust available internal remedies, specifically the complaint procedure before ICASA, as required by section 7(2) of PAJA. No exceptional circumstances were shown to...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.