Mkhonto and Others v Minister of Basic Education and Others (2839/2023) [2024] ZAMPMBHC 70 (12 August 2024)

Mkhonto and Others v Minister of Basic Education and Others (2839/2023) [2024] ZAMPMBHC 70 (12 August 2024)

Although the Department established that the learners committed examination irregularities, it failed to comply with the mandatory procedural requirements set out in Annexure M to the Regulations and section 3 of PAJA. The Department did not provide proper notice to parents/guardians, did not allow adequate time for the learners to respond, conducted group hearings contrary to the Regulations, and failed to record the hearings. These procedural defects rendered the administrative action unfair and unlawful, notwithstanding the substantive finding of cheating. The learners' rights to fair administrative action were infringed, and the decision to nullify and withhold their results must be...

Citation
[2024] ZAMPMBHC 70
Parties
Applicant: Rodgers Mkhonto and 62 Learners; Applicant: Kgotatso Neo Molopo; Applicant: Archiebold Thabang Mathebula; Applicant: Jabulile Mabaso and 384 Others; Respondent: Minister of Basic Education; Respondent: Director General: Department of Education; Respondent: MEC: Department of Education; Respondent: UMALUSI
Court
Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 August 2024
Case Number
2839/2023
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application granted; the Department's decision is reviewed and set aside.
Judges
Roelofse
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Procedural Fairness, Disciplinary Hearings, Examination Irregularities, Review of Administrative Action
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Procedural Fairness Disciplinary Hearings Examination Irregularities Review of Administrative Action

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

Rodgers Mkhonto and 62 Learners

Applicant

Kgotatso Neo Molopo

Applicant

Archiebold Thabang Mathebula

Applicant

Jabulile Mabaso and 384 Others

Applicant

Minister of Basic Education

Respondent

Director General: Department of Education

Respondent

MEC: Department of Education

Respondent

UMALUSI

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Department of Education's decision to nullify and withhold the learners' examination results was lawful and procedurally fair.
  2. 2 Whether the Department complied with the mandatory procedures set out in the Regulations and PAJA when investigating and sanctioning the learners.
  3. 3 Whether the learners' rights to fair administrative action were infringed by the manner in which the disciplinary hearings were conducted.

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Department established that the learners committed examination irregularities, it failed to comply with the mandatory procedural requirements set out in Annexure M to the Regulations and section 3 of PAJA. The Department did not provide proper notice to parents/guardians, did not allow adequate time for the learners to respond, conducted group hearings contrary to the Regulations, and failed to record the hearings. These procedural defects rendered the administrative action unfair and unlawful, notwithstanding the substantive finding of cheating. The learners' rights to fair administrative action were infringed, and the decision to nullify and withhold their results must be...

Court Disposition

Application granted; the Department's decision is reviewed and set aside.

Orders

  • The First to Fourth Respondents' decision dated 31 March 2022 is reviewed and set aside.
  • The First to Fourth Respondents are ordered to release the examination results of the schools and subjects listed in the notices of motion under case numbers 2839/2022 and 2354/22.