MEC for Welfare v Njongi (ECA62/06) [2006] ZAECHC 69 (6 December 2006)

MEC for Welfare v Njongi (ECA62/06) [2006] ZAECHC 69 (6 December 2006)

The respondent's claim for arrears of her disability grant became due and recoverable in July 2000, when the grant was reinstated and the amount owing was ascertainable. Extinctive prescription commenced at that point, and as more than three years elapsed before proceedings were instituted, the claim had prescribed and was unenforceable. The review of the administrative action terminating the grant was academic, as the monetary claim was prescribed and the appellant did not contest the lawfulness of the termination. The court a quo erred in upholding the respondent's claim and granting relief. The proper order is to dismiss the application and direct each party to pay their own costs.

Citation
[2006] ZAECHC 69
Parties
Appellant: Member of the Executive Council for Welfare; Respondent: Deliwe Muriel Njongi
Court
High Courts - Eastern Cape
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 December 2006
Case Number
62/06
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal upheld. The order of the court a quo is set aside and substituted with dismissal of the application. Each party to pay their own costs.
Judges
Leach, Chetty, Mhlantla
Legal Topics
Extinctive Prescription, Unlawful Administrative Action, Social Grants, Review Proceedings
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Extinctive Prescription Unlawful Administrative Action Social Grants Review Proceedings

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Member of the Executive Council for Welfare

Appellant

Deliwe Muriel Njongi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's monetary claim for arrears of disability grant had prescribed under the Prescription Act.
  2. 2 Whether the review of the administrative action terminating the grant should be entertained when the monetary claim had prescribed.
  3. 3 Whether the delay in launching review proceedings should be condoned.

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent's claim for arrears of her disability grant became due and recoverable in July 2000, when the grant was reinstated and the amount owing was ascertainable. Extinctive prescription commenced at that point, and as more than three years elapsed before proceedings were instituted, the claim had prescribed and was unenforceable. The review of the administrative action terminating the grant was academic, as the monetary claim was prescribed and the appellant did not contest the lawfulness of the termination. The court a quo erred in upholding the respondent's claim and granting relief. The proper order is to dismiss the application and direct each party to pay their own costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld. The order of the court a quo is set aside and substituted with dismissal of the application. Each party to pay their own costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • The parties are to pay their own costs.