Mafungwa and Another v Walter Sisulu University and Another (1485/2018) [2019] ZAECMHC 70 (5 November 2019)

Mafungwa and Another v Walter Sisulu University and Another (1485/2018) [2019] ZAECMHC 70 (5 November 2019)

The court found that the applicants were afforded a procedurally fair hearing as required by Article 6 of the University Disciplinary Code. They were given notice of the hearing, an opportunity to make representations, and were invited to show cause why they should not be suspended. The Code does not require the Campus Rector to ask specific questions or to record the proceedings in a particular manner. The applicants did not allege any prejudice resulting from the alleged failure to record, and the facts of their representations were common cause. The suspension was made in the interests of the University community, as required by the Code. The reconsideration of suspension was a...

Citation
[2019] ZAECMHC 70
Parties
Applicant: Siphesihle Mafungwa; Applicant: Yamkela Mxokozeli; Respondent: Walter Sisulu University; Respondent: Minister Jadezweni – Rector Campus, Walter Sisulu University
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 November 2019
Case Number
1485/2018
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Final Judgment on Review of Administrative Suspension
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Zono
Legal Topics
University Disciplinary Code, Suspension of Students, Procedural Fairness, Right to Hearing
Administrative Law Civil Procedure University Disciplinary Code Suspension of Students Procedural Fairness Right to Hearing

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Siphesihle Mafungwa

Applicant

Yamkela Mxokozeli

Applicant

Walter Sisulu University

Respondent

Minister Jadezweni – Rector Campus, Walter Sisulu University

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Final Judgment on Review of Administrative Suspension

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants were afforded a procedurally fair hearing before suspension from the University.
  2. 2 Whether the Campus Rector was required to ask questions during the hearing or record the proceedings.
  3. 3 Whether the suspension decision complied with Article 6 of the University Disciplinary Code.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants were afforded a procedurally fair hearing as required by Article 6 of the University Disciplinary Code. They were given notice of the hearing, an opportunity to make representations, and were invited to show cause why they should not be suspended. The Code does not require the Campus Rector to ask specific questions or to record the proceedings in a particular manner. The applicants did not allege any prejudice resulting from the alleged failure to record, and the facts of their representations were common cause. The suspension was made in the interests of the University community, as required by the Code. The reconsideration of suspension was a...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.