Manaka v University of the Witwatersrand (021837/2023) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1186 (18 October 2023)

Manaka v University of the Witwatersrand (021837/2023) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1186 (18 October 2023)

The court held that the applicant is entitled under Rule 53 to transcripts of the proceedings and the names of panel members involved in the decisions to exclude him from the MBBCh III programme, provided such transcripts exist. The court found no convincing reason to exclude these items from the record, as they are directly relevant to the administrative decision under review. However, the court determined that the statistics and other information sought by the applicant do not form part of the record, as there is no evidence they were before the decision-makers or considered in the impugned decisions. The court rejected the applicant's reliance on Rule 35, section 173 of the...

Citation
[2023] ZAGPJHC 1186
Parties
Applicant: Koketso Monobe Manaka; Respondent: University of the Witwatersrand
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 October 2023
Case Number
021837/2023
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application to Compel Production of Documents in Pending Review
Outcome
Application to compel granted in part; respondent ordered to provide transcripts and panel member names, with redaction of personal information; costs in the cause.
Judges
JW Scholtz
Legal Topics
Rule 53 Record, Academic Exclusion, Discovery of Documents, Mootness, Redaction of Personal Information
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Rule 53 Record Academic Exclusion Discovery of Documents Mootness Redaction of Personal Information

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

Koketso Monobe Manaka

Applicant

University of the Witwatersrand

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Application to Compel Production of Documents in Pending Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent is obliged to furnish the applicant with transcripts of proceedings and names of panel members under Rule 53.
  2. 2 Whether the statistics and other information sought by the applicant form part of the record of proceedings for review.
  3. 3 Whether the application is moot given the applicant's acceptance of an alternative degree and the lack of prospects for success in the main review.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicant is entitled under Rule 53 to transcripts of the proceedings and the names of panel members involved in the decisions to exclude him from the MBBCh III programme, provided such transcripts exist. The court found no convincing reason to exclude these items from the record, as they are directly relevant to the administrative decision under review. However, the court determined that the statistics and other information sought by the applicant do not form part of the record, as there is no evidence they were before the decision-makers or considered in the impugned decisions. The court rejected the applicant's reliance on Rule 35, section 173 of the...

Court Disposition

Application to compel granted in part; respondent ordered to provide transcripts and panel member names, with redaction of personal information; costs in the cause.

Orders

  • The respondent is directed to furnish the applicant with transcripts of the recordings of proceedings of the Wits Readmission Committee – 1 (WRC1) and the Wits Readmission Committee – 2 (WRC2) relating to the decision to refuse the applicant permission to renew his registration for the MBBCh III course for the 2023...
  • Should the above-mentioned transcripts not exist or be available, the respondent shall file an affidavit confirming such fact and explaining why such transcripts are not available.