Electoral Commission v Abland (Pty) Ltd and Others (73405/2014) [2017] ZAGPPHC 503 (3 August 2017)

Electoral Commission v Abland (Pty) Ltd and Others (73405/2014) [2017] ZAGPPHC 503 (3 August 2017)

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a full and reasonable explanation for the extraordinary delay in bringing the review application. The evidence indicated that the Commission was aware of the alleged irregularities long before the stated date, and the explanation regarding fear of a compromised relationship with Adv Tlakula was deemed unacceptable and contrary to the statutory duty of impartiality. On the merits, the court held that while certain irregularities occurred in the procurement process, they were not material or egregious, and the intended purposes of the requirements were substantially achieved. The procurement of movable fittings was condoned by the...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 503
Parties
Applicant: Electoral Commission; Respondent: Abland (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Pivotman (Pty) Ltd N.O.; Respondent: Khwela City Property Services (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Pivotal Fund Ltd
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 August 2017
Case Number
73405/2014
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Application for Condonation and Review
Outcome
Application for condonation refused; main application dismissed with costs.
Judges
D S Fourie
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Public Procurement, Condonation for Delay, Conflict of Interest, Judicial Review, Lease Agreement
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Land and Property Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Public Procurement Condonation for Delay Conflict of Interest Judicial Review +1 more

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 6 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Electoral Commission

Applicant

Abland (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Pivotman (Pty) Ltd N.O.

Respondent

Khwela City Property Services (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Pivotal Fund Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Application for Condonation and Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to condonation for the late filing of the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the procurement process for the lease and addenda was procedurally unfair or unlawful under PAJA.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has demonstrated reasonable prospects of success on the merits of the review.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a full and reasonable explanation for the extraordinary delay in bringing the review application. The evidence indicated that the Commission was aware of the alleged irregularities long before the stated date, and the explanation regarding fear of a compromised relationship with Adv Tlakula was deemed unacceptable and contrary to the statutory duty of impartiality. On the merits, the court held that while certain irregularities occurred in the procurement process, they were not material or egregious, and the intended purposes of the requirements were substantially achieved. The procurement of movable fittings was condoned by the...

Court Disposition

Application for condonation refused; main application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for condoning the late filing of the applicant's review application is refused.
  • The main application is dismissed with costs, including the costs consequent upon the employment of two counsel.