Harrielall v University of KwaZulu-Natal (493/2016) [2017] ZASCA 25 (27 March 2017)

Harrielall v University of KwaZulu-Natal (493/2016) [2017] ZASCA 25 (27 March 2017)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant failed to establish, in her founding affidavit, that the University of KwaZulu-Natal did not consider her application properly or acted arbitrarily in applying its admissions policy. The appellant's arguments evolved during litigation and on appeal, but the final challenge was not contained in the founding papers, and counsel conceded that the appeal could not succeed on grounds not properly raised. The court found no basis to interfere with the High Court's conclusion that the admissions policy was applied lawfully and consistently. Regarding costs, the majority held that the issues were not complex and did not justify the employment of...

Citation
[2017] ZASCA 25
Parties
Appellant: Niekara Harrielall; Respondent: University of KwaZulu-Natal
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 March 2017
Case Number
493/2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Kwa Zulu Natal Division of the High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Cachalia, Swain, Molemela, Gorven, Mbatha
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Higher Education Admissions, Judicial Review, Costs Award, Interpretation of Policy
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Higher Education Admissions Judicial Review Costs Award Interpretation of Policy

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Niekara Harrielall

Appellant

University of KwaZulu-Natal

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Kwa Zulu Natal Division of the High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the University of KwaZulu-Natal properly considered the appellant's application for admission to the MBChB degree under its admissions policy.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent applied its admissions policy consistently and lawfully in refusing the appellant's application.
  3. 3 Whether new grounds for review raised on appeal, not contained in the founding affidavit, can be entertained.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant failed to establish, in her founding affidavit, that the University of KwaZulu-Natal did not consider her application properly or acted arbitrarily in applying its admissions policy. The appellant's arguments evolved during litigation and on appeal, but the final challenge was not contained in the founding papers, and counsel conceded that the appeal could not succeed on grounds not properly raised. The court found no basis to interfere with the High Court's conclusion that the admissions policy was applied lawfully and consistently. Regarding costs, the majority held that the issues were not complex and did not justify the employment of...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.