Logbro Properties CC v Bedderson NO and Others (372/2001) [2002] ZASCA 135; [2003] 1 All SA 424 (SCA); 2003 (2) SA 460 (SCA) (18 October 2002)

Logbro Properties CC v Bedderson NO and Others (372/2001) [2002] ZASCA 135; [2003] 1 All SA 424 (SCA); 2003 (2) SA 460 (SCA) (18 October 2002)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the provincial tender committee, when reconsidering the tenders after the High Court set aside the original award, was entitled to take into account supervening considerations such as the increase in property values. The committee's mandate was to dispose of public assets in the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2002] ZASCA 135
Parties
Appellant: Logbro Properties CC; Respondent: S A Bedderson, NO; Respondent: Minister of Housing; Respondent: National Housing Board; Respondent: Minister of Housing, KwaZulu-Natal; Respondent: Balsons Investments CC; Respondent: K R Govender; Respondent: SB Mkhize; Respondent: K Naidoo; Respondent: J Narainsammy; Respondent: R G Moodley; Respondent: Eversure Cartage; Respondent: Moodley's Property Holdings
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 October 2002
Case Number
372/2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Natal Provincial Division of the High Court
Outcome
Appeal upheld in part; the committee's 1997 decision set aside and matter remitted for reconsideration with procedural fairness.
Judges
Howie JA, Farlam JA, Cameron JA, Heher AJA, Lewis AJA
Legal Topics
Tender Process, Procedural Fairness, Audi Alteram Partem, Public Interest, Contractual Vs Administrative Action, Remittal of Decision
Administrative Law Land and Property Civil Procedure Tender Process Procedural Fairness Audi Alteram Partem Public Interest Contractual Vs Administrative Action +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Logbro Properties CC

Appellant

S A Bedderson, NO

Respondent

Minister of Housing

Respondent

National Housing Board

Respondent

Minister of Housing, KwaZulu-Natal

Respondent

Balsons Investments CC

Respondent

K R Govender

Respondent

SB Mkhize

Respondent

K Naidoo

Respondent

J Narainsammy

Respondent

R G Moodley

Respondent

Eversure Cartage

Respondent

Moodley's Property Holdings

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Natal Provincial Division of the High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a provincial tender committee reconsidering a tender set aside by court may take into account supervening considerations such as increased property values.
  2. 2 Whether the committee was required to afford the appellant an opportunity to make representations on the significance of the price increase.
  3. 3 Whether the tender process was governed by principles of administrative justice or purely contractual terms.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the provincial tender committee, when reconsidering the tenders after the High Court set aside the original award, was entitled to take into account supervening considerations such as the increase in property values. The committee's mandate was to dispose of public assets in the public interest, and it would have been improper to ignore the legitimate interest of the State in obtaining the best possible price. However, the court found that procedural fairness required the committee to afford the appellant and other compliant tenderers an opportunity to make representations, at least in writing, on any factor that might lead the committee not to award...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld in part; the committee's 1997 decision set aside and matter remitted for reconsideration with procedural fairness.

Orders

  • The decision taken on 4 March 1997 by the assets committee of the Province of KwaZulu-Natal to re-advertise Lot 11113 Brackenham, Richards Bay, KwaZulu-Natal, for sale by public tender is set aside.
  • The fourth respondent is directed to appoint within 30 days a committee to reconsider the tenders considered on 4 March 1997.