Matsepe and Another v Minister of Finance and Others (10139/2022) [2023] ZAGPPHC 383 (1 June 2023)

Matsepe and Another v Minister of Finance and Others (10139/2022) [2023] ZAGPPHC 383 (1 June 2023)

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The first applicant did not establish locus standi to bring a collateral challenge to Regulation 6(c), as the regulation was not central to the charges against him. The second applicant's condonation application was dismissed due to an excessive delay and lack of merit. The court held that the application did not raise a constitutional point, and the Biowatch principle was not applicable to the costs order. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2023] ZAGPPHC 383
Parties
Applicant: Kabelo John Matsepe; Applicant: Moshkate Investment Group (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Minister of Finance; Respondent: Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs; Respondent: National Director of Public Prosecution; Respondent: South African Local Government Association
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 June 2023
Case Number
10139/2022
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Dismissal of Declaratory and Review Application
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
E.M Kubushi
Legal Topics
Municipal Finance Management Act, Collateral Challenge, Locus Standi, Condonation, Costs Order
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Municipal Finance Management Act Collateral Challenge Locus Standi Condonation Costs Order

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kabelo John Matsepe

Applicant

Moshkate Investment Group (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Minister of Finance

Respondent

Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs

Respondent

National Director of Public Prosecution

Respondent

South African Local Government Association

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Dismissal of Declaratory and Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the dismissal of their application challenging Regulation 6(c) of the Municipal Investment Regulations.
  2. 2 Whether the first applicant has locus standi to bring a collateral challenge to Regulation 6(c).
  3. 3 Whether the second applicant's condonation application should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The first applicant did not establish locus standi to bring a collateral challenge to Regulation 6(c), as the regulation was not central to the charges against him. The second applicant's condonation application was dismissed due to an excessive delay and lack of merit. The court held that the application did not raise a constitutional point, and the Biowatch principle was not applicable to the costs order. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.