!Kheis Municipality v Mareka (3180/2022) [2025] ZAFSHC 38 (6 February 2025)

!Kheis Municipality v Mareka (3180/2022) [2025] ZAFSHC 38 (6 February 2025)

The court found that it had jurisdiction to hear the matter as the respondent resides within its area and the cause of action relates to his employment. The applicant did not unreasonably delay in bringing the review application, as the delay was satisfactorily explained by the change in municipal management and subsequent discovery of the irregular appointment. The appointment of the respondent was unlawful because the post did not exist on the approved staff establishment and was not approved by council, as required by the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act and its regulations. The Municipal Manager acted contrary to council policy and the regulatory framework. The decision to...

Citation
[2025] ZAFSHC 38
Parties
Applicant: !Kheis Municipality; Respondent: KG Mareka
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 February 2025
Case Number
3180/2022
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application granted; the appointment decision and employment contract are reviewed and set aside.
Judges
Mhlambi, Jordaan
Legal Topics
Legality Review, Municipal Staff Appointments, Jurisdiction of High Court, Delay in Review, Local Government Structures Act
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Legality Review Municipal Staff Appointments Jurisdiction of High Court Delay in Review Local Government Structures 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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

!Kheis Municipality

Applicant

KG Mareka

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Free State High Court has jurisdiction to hear the legality review application.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant unreasonably delayed in bringing the review application.
  3. 3 Whether the appointment of the respondent was lawful and in accordance with the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act and related regulations.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that it had jurisdiction to hear the matter as the respondent resides within its area and the cause of action relates to his employment. The applicant did not unreasonably delay in bringing the review application, as the delay was satisfactorily explained by the change in municipal management and subsequent discovery of the irregular appointment. The appointment of the respondent was unlawful because the post did not exist on the approved staff establishment and was not approved by council, as required by the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act and its regulations. The Municipal Manager acted contrary to council policy and the regulatory framework. The decision to...

Court Disposition

Application granted; the appointment decision and employment contract are reviewed and set aside.

Orders

  • The decision of T.F. Leeuw, as Municipal Manager, to appoint the respondent as Specialist Corporate Support Services on 1 July 2021 is reviewed and set aside.
  • The employment contract concluded between the applicant and respondent dated 1 July 2021 is reviewed and set aside.