Maema and Others v Minister of International Relations and Cooperation and Others (831/2020; 15509/20; 15507/20) [2022] ZAGPPHC 736 (28 September 2022)

Maema and Others v Minister of International Relations and Cooperation and Others (831/2020; 15509/20; 15507/20) [2022] ZAGPPHC 736 (28 September 2022)

The court found that the Director-General's decisions to extend and then revoke the applicants' terms of duty were quintessentially labour-related and contractual in nature. These decisions did not involve the implementation of legislation and had no direct consequences for the general public, thus failing to qualify as administrative action under PAJA. Furthermore, no new agreement was concluded to amend the original transfer letters, and the extension approvals were not finalised contractually. Therefore, the Director-General was entitled to revoke the extension decision, and there was no basis to set aside the revocation. The applications for review were dismissed.

Citation
[2022] ZAGPPHC 736
Parties
Applicant: Malebo Kwena Elsie Maema; Applicant: Richard Sibusiso Skhosana; Applicant: Raoaga Itumeleng Lethoko; Respondent: Minister of International Relations and Cooperation; Respondent: Department of International Relations and Cooperation; Respondent: Director-General, Department of International Relations and Cooperation
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 September 2022
Case Number
831/2020; 15509/20; 15507/20
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Applications dismissed with costs awarded against the applicants.
Judges
Lazarus
Legal Topics
Administrative Action, Functus Officio, Contractual Employment Terms, Review of Administrative Decisions
Labour Law Civil Procedure Administrative Action Functus Officio Contractual Employment Terms Review of Administrative Decisions

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Malebo Kwena Elsie Maema

Applicant

Richard Sibusiso Skhosana

Applicant

Raoaga Itumeleng Lethoko

Applicant

Minister of International Relations and Cooperation

Respondent

Department of International Relations and Cooperation

Respondent

Director-General, Department of International Relations and Cooperation

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Director-General's decision to extend and then revoke the applicants' terms of duty constitutes administrative action under PAJA.
  2. 2 Whether the Director-General was functus officio after approving the extension of the applicants' terms of duty.
  3. 3 Whether the employment terms were contractually amended by the extension decision.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Director-General's decisions to extend and then revoke the applicants' terms of duty were quintessentially labour-related and contractual in nature. These decisions did not involve the implementation of legislation and had no direct consequences for the general public, thus failing to qualify as administrative action under PAJA. Furthermore, no new agreement was concluded to amend the original transfer letters, and the extension approvals were not finalised contractually. Therefore, the Director-General was entitled to revoke the extension decision, and there was no basis to set aside the revocation. The applications for review were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed with costs awarded against the applicants.

Orders

  • The applications are dismissed.
  • The applicants in each of the three matters are ordered to pay the costs of their respective applications.