LSM Security (Pty) Ltd and Others v MEC, Department of Social Development, EC and Another (2300/2022) [2023] ZAECQBHC 12 (24 January 2023)

LSM Security (Pty) Ltd and Others v MEC, Department of Social Development, EC and Another (2300/2022) [2023] ZAECQBHC 12 (24 January 2023)

The court found that the applicants had established a prima facie right to participate in a fair and lawful tender process and were entitled to adequate reasons for the rejection of their bids. The Department's reasons were found to be vague, generic, and lacking in specificity, failing to meet the requirements of transparency and fairness under PAJA and the Constitution. The urgency of the matter was justified by the imminent implementation of the contract and the risk of irreparable harm to the applicants and the public interest. The balance of convenience favoured the grant of interim relief, as the respondents failed to demonstrate any real prejudice and did not take the court into...

Citation
[2023] ZAECQBHC 12
Parties
Applicant: LSM Security (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Mkwaze Security (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: NUBC Security (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Ngonyama Security (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: MEC, Department of Social Development, EC; Respondent: Golden Security Services CC
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Gqeberha
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 January 2023
Case Number
2300/2022
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interim Interdict Pending Anticipated Review Application
Outcome
Interim interdict granted pending review application.
Judges
Hartle
Legal Topics
Public Procurement, Interim Interdict, Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act, Adequacy of Reasons, Urgency Requirements
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Public Procurement Interim Interdict Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act Adequacy of Reasons +1 more

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LSM Security (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Mkwaze Security (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

NUBC Security (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Ngonyama Security (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

MEC, Department of Social Development, EC

Respondent

Golden Security Services CC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Interim Interdict Pending Anticipated Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to interim interdict relief pending a review of the tender award.
  2. 2 Whether the reasons provided by the Department for the rejection of the applicants' bids were adequate and lawful.
  3. 3 Whether the tender process and award complied with constitutional and statutory requirements for fairness and transparency.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had established a prima facie right to participate in a fair and lawful tender process and were entitled to adequate reasons for the rejection of their bids. The Department's reasons were found to be vague, generic, and lacking in specificity, failing to meet the requirements of transparency and fairness under PAJA and the Constitution. The urgency of the matter was justified by the imminent implementation of the contract and the risk of irreparable harm to the applicants and the public interest. The balance of convenience favoured the grant of interim relief, as the respondents failed to demonstrate any real prejudice and did not take the court into...

Court Disposition

Interim interdict granted pending review application.

Orders

  • The implementation of the tender award under Bid Number SCMU4-21/220019 is stayed pending finalisation of review proceedings.
  • The successful bidder is interdicted from commencing any work under Bid Number SCMU4-21/220019.