Grootboom and Others v MEC: Department Of Education, Eastern Province and Another (173/2018) [2019] ZAECGHC 1 (8 January 2019)

Grootboom and Others v MEC: Department Of Education, Eastern Province and Another (173/2018) [2019] ZAECGHC 1 (8 January 2019)

The court found that the applicants failed to establish that their claims had not prescribed, as they had knowledge of the relevant facts and the identity of the debtor prior to the Linkside judgment. The applicants' explanation for late notice was contradictory and not bona fide, and their approach to quantification and notice was inconsistent with statutory requirements. As a result, condonation for late notice under the Institution of Legal Proceedings against Certain Organs of State Act was refused, and the relief sought in Part A of the notice of motion was dismissed. The respondents withdrew opposition to the certification of the class action, and the court granted the orders sought...

Citation
[2019] ZAECGHC 1
Parties
Applicant: Arthur Frans Grootboom; Applicant: Muhammed Ramlan; Applicant: Chere Bouw; Applicant: Joy Williams; Applicant: Jesintha Coltman; Applicant: Candace Steyl; Applicant: Elana Hughes; Respondent: MEC: Department of Education, Eastern Cape Province; Respondent: Superintendent-General: Department of Education, Eastern Cape Province
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 January 2019
Case Number
173/2018
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Condonation and Class Action Certification
Outcome
Application for condonation dismissed; relief in Part A dismissed; relief in Part B granted.
Judges
Plasket
Legal Topics
Institution of Legal Proceedings Act, Prescription, Class Action Certification, Constitutional Damages
Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Institution of Legal Proceedings Act Prescription Class Action Certification Constitutional Damages

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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Arthur Frans Grootboom

Applicant

Muhammed Ramlan

Applicant

Chere Bouw

Applicant

Joy Williams

Applicant

Jesintha Coltman

Applicant

Candace Steyl

Applicant

Elana Hughes

Applicant

MEC: Department of Education, Eastern Cape Province

Respondent

Superintendent-General: Department of Education, Eastern Cape Province

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Condonation and Class Action Certification

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants' claims against the respondents have prescribed under the Prescription Act.
  2. 2 Whether condonation should be granted for late notice under the Institution of Legal Proceedings against Certain Organs of State Act.
  3. 3 Whether the requirements for certification of an opt-in class action are met.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to establish that their claims had not prescribed, as they had knowledge of the relevant facts and the identity of the debtor prior to the Linkside judgment. The applicants' explanation for late notice was contradictory and not bona fide, and their approach to quantification and notice was inconsistent with statutory requirements. As a result, condonation for late notice under the Institution of Legal Proceedings against Certain Organs of State Act was refused, and the relief sought in Part A of the notice of motion was dismissed. The respondents withdrew opposition to the certification of the class action, and the court granted the orders sought...

Court Disposition

Application for condonation dismissed; relief in Part A dismissed; relief in Part B granted.

Orders

  • The application for condonation for the late giving of notice is dismissed.
  • The application for the relief claimed in Part A is dismissed.