Goodhope Plasterers CC T/A Goodhope Construction v Independent Development Trust and Another (5472/2013) [2014] ZAWCHC 67 (29 April 2014)

Goodhope Plasterers CC T/A Goodhope Construction v Independent Development Trust and Another (5472/2013) [2014] ZAWCHC 67 (29 April 2014)

The court found that although the applicant should have scored highest in the tender evaluation, the award to the second respondent was conditional and not final. The IDT was not functus officio and retained the power to withdraw the tender prior to the conclusion of a contract, especially in light of substantial changes to the scope of works, budgetary constraints, and unresolved land issues. The withdrawal was not arbitrary or irrational, as it was rationally related to the changed circumstances and statutory powers under the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act. The applicant was not entitled to substitution or direct award of the tender, as the circumstances did not meet the...

Citation
[2014] ZAWCHC 67
Parties
Applicant: Goodhope Plasterers CC trading as Goodhope Construction; Respondent: The Independent Development Trust; Respondent: GVK-Siya Zama Building Contractors (Pty) Ltd
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 April 2014
Case Number
5472/2013
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review Application Under Rule 53
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Salie-Samuels
Legal Topics
Tender Review, Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Legitimate Expectation, Functus Officio, Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Tender Review Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Legitimate Expectation Functus Officio Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Goodhope Plasterers CC trading as Goodhope Construction

Applicant

The Independent Development Trust

Respondent

GVK-Siya Zama Building Contractors (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review Application Under Rule 53

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the decision to award the tender to the second respondent was lawful and should be set aside.
  2. 2 Whether the subsequent decision to withdraw the tender was lawful and should be set aside.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to have the tender awarded to it as the highest scorer.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the applicant should have scored highest in the tender evaluation, the award to the second respondent was conditional and not final. The IDT was not functus officio and retained the power to withdraw the tender prior to the conclusion of a contract, especially in light of substantial changes to the scope of works, budgetary constraints, and unresolved land issues. The withdrawal was not arbitrary or irrational, as it was rationally related to the changed circumstances and statutory powers under the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act. The applicant was not entitled to substitution or direct award of the tender, as the circumstances did not meet the...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.