Kayula N.O. and Others v Department of Roads and Public Works, Province of Eastern Cape and Others, Kayula N.O. and Others v Department of Roads and Public Works, Province of Eastern Cape and Others (2944/2017, 3026/2017) [2017] ZAECGHC 129 (12 December 2017)

Kayula N.O. and Others v Department of Roads and Public Works, Province of Eastern Cape and Others, Kayula N.O. and Others v Department of Roads and Public Works, Province of Eastern Cape and Others (2944/2017, 3026/2017) [2017] ZAECGHC 129 (12 December 2017)

The court found that consolidation of the two applications is convenient and appropriate. The parties are the same, the applications concern substantially similar reviews of tender awards involving the same building and similar documentation, and the legal representatives are identical. Consolidation will result in significant time and cost savings, and the matters can be dealt with in one judgment with separate references as needed. The court was not persuaded that any party would suffer prejudice from consolidation; rather, it would be beneficial in terms of efficiency and costs. Technical objections regarding the sufficiency of the founding affidavit and the reply were dismissed as...

Citation
[2017] ZAECGHC 129
Parties
Applicant: John Mulenga Kayula N.O.; Applicant: Vuyokazi Kayula N.O.; Applicant: Jonathan Andrew Rademan as nominee of F&J Administrators Trust; Respondent: Department of Roads & Public Works, Province of the Eastern Cape; Respondent: ESDA Properties (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Hemipac Investments (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Sthathu Funding (Pty) Ltd
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 December 2017
Case Number
2944/2017, 3026/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Interlocutory Application for Consolidation
Outcome
The applications are consolidated and shall proceed as one application. Costs of the consolidation application are to be costs in the consolidated application.
Judges
M.J. Lowe
Legal Topics
Consolidation of Applications, Rule 11 Uniform Rules, Review of Tender Award, Interim Interdict
Civil Procedure Consolidation of Applications Rule 11 Uniform Rules Review of Tender Award Interim Interdict

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Mulenga Kayula N.O.

Applicant

Vuyokazi Kayula N.O.

Applicant

Jonathan Andrew Rademan as nominee of F&J Administrators Trust

Applicant

Department of Roads & Public Works, Province of the Eastern Cape

Respondent

ESDA Properties (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Hemipac Investments (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Sthathu Funding (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Interlocutory Application for Consolidation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it is convenient and appropriate to consolidate the two applications for review and interdict.
  2. 2 Whether any party will suffer prejudice as a result of consolidation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that consolidation of the two applications is convenient and appropriate. The parties are the same, the applications concern substantially similar reviews of tender awards involving the same building and similar documentation, and the legal representatives are identical. Consolidation will result in significant time and cost savings, and the matters can be dealt with in one judgment with separate references as needed. The court was not persuaded that any party would suffer prejudice from consolidation; rather, it would be beneficial in terms of efficiency and costs. Technical objections regarding the sufficiency of the founding affidavit and the reply were dismissed as...

Court Disposition

The applications are consolidated and shall proceed as one application. Costs of the consolidation application are to be costs in the consolidated application.

Orders

  • The two applications with case numbers 2944/2017 and 3026/2017 are consolidated and shall proceed as one application.
  • The Registrar shall assign a date for the hearing of the consolidated applications if necessary and upon application.