Macpherson and Others v Stoffels and Others (13789/2013) [2013] ZAWCHC 174; [2014] 1 All SA 221 (WCC) (12 November 2013)

Macpherson and Others v Stoffels and Others (13789/2013) [2013] ZAWCHC 174; [2014] 1 All SA 221 (WCC) (12 November 2013)

The court held that the Speaker of Oudtshoorn Municipality acted ultra vires and unlawfully by suspending and revoking the voting rights of councillors Nel and Van Wyk, as only the Council may make findings of breach and request the MEC to suspend or remove councillors under the Code of Conduct. The Speaker’s actions violated the principle of legality and were not authorised by statute or the Constitution. The MEC lacked locus standi to seek orders compelling the convening of council meetings or to intervene in council procedures, as such powers reside with the Council and Speaker, and provincial intervention must be exercised by the provincial executive in terms of s 139 of the...

Citation
[2013] ZAWCHC 174
Parties
Applicant: Christiaan Macpherson; Applicant: Felicity Magxaka; Applicant: Bernardus van Wyk; Applicant: Vernatt Ivan van der Westhuizen; Applicant: Diane de Jager; Applicant: Julia le Roux; Applicant: Pierre Nel; Applicant: Peter Leslie Roberts; Applicant: Ewa Fortuin; Applicant: Ryk Raymond Wildschut; Applicant: Danie Johan Fourie; Applicant: Jurie Harmse; Applicant: John Maxim; Applicant: Democratic Alliance; Respondent: Johannes Nicolaas Hendrick Stoffels; Respondent: Speaker of Oudtshoorn Municipality; Respondent: Municipal Manager of Oudtshoorn Municipality; Respondent: Western Cape MEC of Local Government, Environmental Affairs and Development Planning
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 November 2013
Case Number
13789/2013
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Third Application to Compel Council Meeting and Review Speaker's Conduct
Outcome
Application partially granted. Relief sought in paragraphs 2 and 3 refused. Declaratory order granted that the Speaker’s actions in suspending and revoking voting rights were ultra vires and unlawful. Counter-application dismissed. Each party to pay own costs in the third application and counter-application. Speaker...
Judges
Schippers
Legal Topics
Municipal Governance, Motions of No Confidence, Code of Conduct for Councillors, Locus Standi, Ultra Vires, Principle of Legality
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Municipal Governance Motions of No Confidence Code of Conduct for Councillors Locus Standi Ultra Vires +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 5 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christiaan Macpherson

Applicant

Felicity Magxaka

Applicant

Bernardus van Wyk

Applicant

Vernatt Ivan van der Westhuizen

Applicant

Diane de Jager

Applicant

Julia le Roux

Applicant

Pierre Nel

Applicant

Peter Leslie Roberts

Applicant

Ewa Fortuin

Applicant

Ryk Raymond Wildschut

Applicant

Danie Johan Fourie

Applicant

Jurie Harmse

Applicant

John Maxim

Applicant

Democratic Alliance

Applicant

Johannes Nicolaas Hendrick Stoffels

Respondent

Speaker of Oudtshoorn Municipality

Respondent

Municipal Manager of Oudtshoorn Municipality

Respondent

Western Cape MEC of Local Government, Environmental Affairs and Development Planning

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Third Application to Compel Council Meeting and Review Speaker's Conduct

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Speaker of Oudtshoorn Municipality acted ultra vires and unlawfully in suspending councillors and revoking voting rights.
  2. 2 Whether the MEC for Local Government had locus standi to bring the application for council intervention.
  3. 3 Whether the Framework Act bars the application as an intergovernmental dispute.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Speaker of Oudtshoorn Municipality acted ultra vires and unlawfully by suspending and revoking the voting rights of councillors Nel and Van Wyk, as only the Council may make findings of breach and request the MEC to suspend or remove councillors under the Code of Conduct. The Speaker’s actions violated the principle of legality and were not authorised by statute or the Constitution. The MEC lacked locus standi to seek orders compelling the convening of council meetings or to intervene in council procedures, as such powers reside with the Council and Speaker, and provincial intervention must be exercised by the provincial executive in terms of s 139 of the...

Court Disposition

Application partially granted. Relief sought in paragraphs 2 and 3 refused. Declaratory order granted that the Speaker’s actions in suspending and revoking voting rights were ultra vires and unlawful. Counter-application dismissed. Each party to pay own costs in the third application and counter-application. Speaker...

Orders

  • This application is dealt with as one of urgency in terms of rule 6(12) of the Rules of Court.
  • Relief sought in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the notice of motion dated 30 September 2013 is refused.