Magoba Mathupusi Ass (Pty) Ltd v Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (2019/61441) [2019] ZAGPPHC 612 (5 December 2019)

Magoba Mathupusi Ass (Pty) Ltd v Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (2019/61441) [2019] ZAGPPHC 612 (5 December 2019)

The court found that the applicant failed to address the requirement of demonstrating that substantial redress could not be afforded at a hearing in due course. The applicant did not establish prejudice sufficient to justify urgency. The matter was therefore not urgent and did not warrant immediate judicial intervention. The application was struck from the roll for lack of urgency.

Citation
[2019] ZAGPPHC 612
Parties
Applicant: Magoba Mathupi Ass (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 December 2019
Case Number
2019/61441
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application to Review Tender Award; Urgent Motion
Outcome
Application struck from the roll for lack of urgency.
Judges
Mokose
Legal Topics
Tender Review, Urgency in Motion Proceedings, Judicial Discretion, Public Interest Interdict
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Tender Review Urgency in Motion Proceedings Judicial Discretion Public Interest Interdict

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Magoba Mathupi Ass (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application to Review Tender Award; Urgent Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application to review the tender award is urgent and should be heard as such.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant will be afforded substantial redress at a hearing in due course.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's conduct in the tender process warrants referral to the Auditor-General.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to address the requirement of demonstrating that substantial redress could not be afforded at a hearing in due course. The applicant did not establish prejudice sufficient to justify urgency. The matter was therefore not urgent and did not warrant immediate judicial intervention. The application was struck from the roll for lack of urgency.

Court Disposition

Application struck from the roll for lack of urgency.

Orders

  • The application is struck for lack of urgency.