Eastern Cape NGO Coalition v MEC for Social Development EC [2021] ZAECGHC 33 (16 March 2021)

Eastern Cape NGO Coalition v MEC for Social Development EC [2021] ZAECGHC 33 (16 March 2021)

The court found that while the Department's policy shift towards transformation and prioritisation of rural communities was constitutionally permissible, the process by which subsidies to NGOs were reduced lacked proper consultation. The meetings relied upon by the respondent did not constitute genuine consultation, as they occurred after the decision had already been made and did not engage meaningfully with the NGOs' expertise or concerns. This procedural shortcoming rendered the decision irrational and unlawful. However, the court held that the applicant was not entitled to compensation or damages, as there was no legitimate expectation of continued funding at previous levels and the...

Citation
[2021] ZAECGHC 33
Parties
Applicant: Eastern Cape NGO Coalition; Respondent: MEC for the Department of Social Development, Eastern Cape Province
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
16 March 2021
Case Number
2460/2018
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
The respondent's decision to reduce or terminate subsidies to NGOs in 2017/2018 is declared irrational and unlawful. Prayers for further relief, including compensation and future consultation orders, are dismissed. The respondent is ordered to pay 60% of the applicant's taxed costs.
Judges
A Govindjee
Legal Topics
Consultation Requirements, Rationality Review, Bill of Rights Limitation, Social Security Rights, Public Administration Principles

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 30 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eastern Cape NGO Coalition

Applicant

MEC for the Department of Social Development, Eastern Cape Province

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Final Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's decision to reduce or terminate NGO subsidies in 2017/2018 was irrational and unlawful.
  2. 2 Whether there was a duty to consult with affected NGOs prior to subsidy reduction.
  3. 3 Whether the process followed by the Department met constitutional and administrative law standards.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that while the Department's policy shift towards transformation and prioritisation of rural communities was constitutionally permissible, the process by which subsidies to NGOs were reduced lacked proper consultation. The meetings relied upon by the respondent did not constitute genuine consultation, as they occurred after the decision had already been made and did not engage meaningfully with the NGOs' expertise or concerns. This procedural shortcoming rendered the decision irrational and unlawful. However, the court held that the applicant was not entitled to compensation or damages, as there was no legitimate expectation of continued funding at previous levels and the...

Court Disposition

The respondent's decision to reduce or terminate subsidies to NGOs in 2017/2018 is declared irrational and unlawful. Prayers for further relief, including compensation and future consultation orders, are dismissed. The respondent is ordered to pay 60% of the applicant's taxed costs.

Orders

  • The respondent’s decision to reduce or terminate subsidies given to non-governmental organisations in 2017/2018 is declared to be irrational and unlawful.
  • Prayers 2, 3 and 4 of the Notice of Motion are dismissed.