Distinctive Choice Security 447 CC t/a D C Security and Another v Western Cape Provincial Government and Others (15236/2019) [2019] ZAWCHC 127 (30 September 2019)

Distinctive Choice Security 447 CC t/a D C Security and Another v Western Cape Provincial Government and Others (15236/2019) [2019] ZAWCHC 127 (30 September 2019)

The court found that both DC Security and Delta failed to establish genuine urgency, as they delayed launching their applications despite knowing of their exclusion from the tender process and impending contract termination. The applicants' reliance on extensions of existing contracts and ongoing review proceedings did not justify their inaction. The correct trigger for urgent relief was the notification of unsuccessful bids, after which prompt action was required. The court held that the urgency claimed was self-created and that the interests of both incumbent and new service providers were neutral factors. The applications for interim relief, intervention, and joinder were therefore...

Citation
[2019] ZAWCHC 127
Parties
Applicant: Distinctive Choice Security 447 CC t/a D C Security; Applicant: Delta Corporate Security Services (Pty) Limited; Respondent: Western Cape Provincial Government; Respondent: Acting Director: Supply Chain Management; Respondent: Accounting Officer of the Department of Finance, Western Cape Provincial Government; Respondent: Head of Department of Community Safety, Western Cape Provincial Government; Respondent: Princeton Protection Services (Pty) Limited; Respondent: Reliance Corporate Security (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Nikao Protection Services CC; Respondent: Head of Department of Health, Western Cape Provincial Government; Respondent: Xoliswa M Holdings (Proprietary) Limited t/a Eagle Age Protection Services
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 September 2019
Case Number
15236/2019
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Interim Relief, Intervention and Joinder
Outcome
Applications for interim relief, intervention, and joinder struck from the roll with costs.
Judges
P A Myburgh
Legal Topics
Public Procurement, Interim Interdict, Urgency, Review of Tender Award, Joinder of Parties
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Public Procurement Interim Interdict Urgency Review of Tender Award Joinder of Parties

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Distinctive Choice Security 447 CC t/a D C Security

Applicant

Delta Corporate Security Services (Pty) Limited

Applicant

Western Cape Provincial Government

Respondent

Acting Director: Supply Chain Management

Respondent

Accounting Officer of the Department of Finance, Western Cape Provincial Government

Respondent

Head of Department of Community Safety, Western Cape Provincial Government

Respondent

Princeton Protection Services (Pty) Limited

Respondent

Reliance Corporate Security (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Nikao Protection Services CC

Respondent

Head of Department of Health, Western Cape Provincial Government

Respondent

Xoliswa M Holdings (Proprietary) Limited t/a Eagle Age Protection Services

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Interim Relief, Intervention and Joinder

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants established sufficient urgency to justify deviation from normal court procedures.
  2. 2 Whether the requirements for interim relief pending review of the tender process were met.
  3. 3 Whether Delta Corporate Security Services (Pty) Limited should be permitted to intervene and join additional parties.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that both DC Security and Delta failed to establish genuine urgency, as they delayed launching their applications despite knowing of their exclusion from the tender process and impending contract termination. The applicants' reliance on extensions of existing contracts and ongoing review proceedings did not justify their inaction. The correct trigger for urgent relief was the notification of unsuccessful bids, after which prompt action was required. The court held that the urgency claimed was self-created and that the interests of both incumbent and new service providers were neutral factors. The applications for interim relief, intervention, and joinder were therefore...

Court Disposition

Applications for interim relief, intervention, and joinder struck from the roll with costs.

Orders

  • The application for interim relief brought by Distinctive Choice Security 447 CC trading as DC Security is struck from the roll with costs, including costs of two counsel where employed.
  • The application for intervention and joinder brought by Delta Corporate Security Services (Pty) Limited is struck from the roll with costs, including costs of two counsel where employed.