Kunene and Others v Minister of Police (260/2020) [2021] ZASCA 76 (10 June 2021)

Kunene and Others v Minister of Police (260/2020) [2021] ZASCA 76 (10 June 2021)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the high court was correct to rescind the two compromise orders. The State Attorney and counsel acted without authority, contrary to express instructions, and their conduct was irrational and tainted by fraud. The principle of legality and the rule of law override ostensible authority where public power is exercised unlawfully. The addition of a new cause of action after settlement, and the irregular tender of quantum, rendered the agreements and resulting orders invalid. Public interest and constitutional principles demand that courts not endorse orders tainted by illegality or fraud. The personal costs orders against the second and third appellants...

Citation
[2021] ZASCA 76
Parties
Appellant: Ayanda Irvin Kunene; Appellant: Kgosi Gustav Lekabe; Appellant: Hassan Ebrahim Kajee; Respondent: Minister of Police
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 June 2021
Case Number
260/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Rescinding Two Compromise Orders
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs against the second and third appellants on an attorney and client scale, including costs of two counsel where employed.
Judges
Dambuza, Mocumie, Schippers, Eksteen, Mabindla-Boqwana
Legal Topics
Compromise Agreements, Ostensible Authority, Principle of Legality, Rescission of Judgment, Fraud, Public Power
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Compromise Agreements Ostensible Authority Principle of Legality Rescission of Judgment Fraud Public Power

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 6 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ayanda Irvin Kunene

Appellant

Kgosi Gustav Lekabe

Appellant

Hassan Ebrahim Kajee

Appellant

Minister of Police

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Rescinding Two Compromise Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the high court was correct to rescind and set aside the compromise orders granted on 6 February 2017 and 2 March 2018.
  2. 2 Whether the State Attorney had ostensible authority to bind the Minister of Police to the settlement agreements.
  3. 3 Whether the principle of legality and rule of law override ostensible authority in the context of public power.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the high court was correct to rescind the two compromise orders. The State Attorney and counsel acted without authority, contrary to express instructions, and their conduct was irrational and tainted by fraud. The principle of legality and the rule of law override ostensible authority where public power is exercised unlawfully. The addition of a new cause of action after settlement, and the irregular tender of quantum, rendered the agreements and resulting orders invalid. Public interest and constitutional principles demand that courts not endorse orders tainted by illegality or fraud. The personal costs orders against the second and third appellants...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs against the second and third appellants on an attorney and client scale, including costs of two counsel where employed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs against the second and third appellants on an attorney and client scale, including the costs of two counsel where so employed.