Mabotwane Security Services v Rustenburg Local Municipality and Another (UM119/19) [2020] ZANWHC 70 (20 August 2020)

Mabotwane Security Services v Rustenburg Local Municipality and Another (UM119/19) [2020] ZANWHC 70 (20 August 2020)

The court found that the applicant’s tender submission failed to comply with mandatory requirements of the tender process, specifically the completion of the MBD 4 declaration of interest by all members and the submission of current municipal statements for the registered address. These omissions constituted non-compliance with peremptory bid conditions and statutory procurement regulations. The court held that such non-compliance rendered the applicant’s bid not 'acceptable' under the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act and related regulations. The principle of legality and the constitutional requirement for fair, transparent, and lawful procurement processes precluded the...

Citation
[2020] ZANWHC 70
Parties
Applicant: Mabotwane Security Services; Respondent: Rustenburg Local Municipality; Respondent: Ally’s Counter Force Security
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 August 2020
Case Number
UM119/19
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Final Judgment on Review and Counter Application
Outcome
The applicant’s review application is dismissed with costs. The first respondent’s counter-application is granted with costs.
Judges
M.E. Mahlangu
Legal Topics
Public Procurement, Acceptable Tender, Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act, Municipal Finance Management Act, Bid Evaluation, Declaration of Interest
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Public Procurement Acceptable Tender Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act Municipal Finance Management Act Bid Evaluation Declaration of Interest

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mabotwane Security Services

Applicant

Rustenburg Local Municipality

Respondent

Ally’s Counter Force Security

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Final Judgment on Review and Counter Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant’s tender submission constituted an 'acceptable tender' under the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act and related regulations.
  2. 2 Whether the first respondent’s decision to split the tender between the applicant and the second respondent complied with statutory procurement requirements.
  3. 3 Whether the tender process was lawful, fair, and in accordance with section 217(1) of the Constitution.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant’s tender submission failed to comply with mandatory requirements of the tender process, specifically the completion of the MBD 4 declaration of interest by all members and the submission of current municipal statements for the registered address. These omissions constituted non-compliance with peremptory bid conditions and statutory procurement regulations. The court held that such non-compliance rendered the applicant’s bid not 'acceptable' under the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act and related regulations. The principle of legality and the constitutional requirement for fair, transparent, and lawful procurement processes precluded the...

Court Disposition

The applicant’s review application is dismissed with costs. The first respondent’s counter-application is granted with costs.

Orders

  • The applicant did not submit an 'acceptable tender' and its review application is dismissed with costs.
  • The first respondent’s counter-application is granted with costs.