Motloung and Others v Nquthu Local Municipality and Others (6062/2020P) [2021] ZAKZPHC 17 (17 May 2021)

Motloung and Others v Nquthu Local Municipality and Others (6062/2020P) [2021] ZAKZPHC 17 (17 May 2021)

The court found that the appointments of the 28th to 30th respondents at the council meeting of 2 September 2020 were invalid due to non-compliance with the peremptory requirements of rule 13.2 of the standing rules, which prohibits the transaction of new business at continuation meetings. The urgency cited by the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] ZAKZPHC 17
Parties
Applicant: Tahleho Johannes Motloung; Applicant: Constance Thandiwe Buthelezi; Applicant: Lephla Sizakele Hoffman; Applicant: Nthabiseng Cynthia Xulu; Applicant: Ntomfikile Samkelisiwe Mkhize; Applicant: Lehlohonolo Cyprian Moloi; Applicant: Simangele Grace Kunene; Applicant: Moses Sipho Kevin Gumbi; Applicant: Goodwill Fukang Molefe; Applicant: Sibusiso Mandlenkosi Charles Zikode; Applicant: Nlebuheng Maureen Khanye; Respondent: Nquthu Local Municipality; Respondent: Council of Nquthu Local Municipality; Respondent: Bonginkosi Paul Gumbi; Respondent: Welcome Sakhile Mpanza; Respondent: Mpumelelo Baldwin Jiyane; Respondent: Zanele Sithole; Respondent: Richard Sikhumbuzo Langa; Respondent: Emmanuel Mbekezeli Mkhwanazi; Respondent: Mbongeni Ephraim Mnguni; Respondent: Emmanueal Lindokuhle Shabalala; Respondent: Njabulo Mbongiseni Buthelezi; Respondent: Sifiso Msalofy Buthelezi; Respondent: Sabelo Praisegod Mathe; Respondent: Fana Alfred Hletshwayo; Respondent: Siyabonga Mabilabila Kunene; Respondent: Jerry Nathi Khoza; Respondent: Joyce Zandile Ndima; Respondent: Sakhile Derrick Masimula; Respondent: Pertunia Phindile Ntombela; Respondent: Ntombikayise Goodness Mdlalose; Respondent: Mengiwe Ronit Ngobese; Respondent: Thamsanqa Abion Dlamini; Respondent: Bonginkosi Innocent Zwane; Respondent: Evelyn Thulisile Nhlebela; Respondent: Holihlahla Mntombuhle Shelembe; Respondent: Member of the Executive Council for Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs; Respondent: Member of the Executive Council for Finance and Treasury, KwaZulu-Natal; Respondent: Sithembiso Blessing Mthembu; Respondent: Nombuso Zandile Mbongwa; Respondent: Bhekani Brian Sokhulu; Respondent: ABSA Bank; Respondent: First National Bank; Respondent: The Standard Bank of South Africa; Respondent: Nedbank; Respondent: Investec Bank
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 May 2021
Case Number
6062/2020P
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
The main application succeeds; the first impugned decision is declared invalid. The counter-application is dismissed with costs.
Judges
Mnguni
Legal Topics
Municipal Manager Appointment, Standing Rules Compliance, Ultra Vires Decision, Covid19 Regulations, Council Meeting Procedure
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Municipal Manager Appointment Standing Rules Compliance Ultra Vires Decision Covid19 Regulations Council Meeting Procedure

Source-derived case record

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tahleho Johannes Motloung

Applicant

Constance Thandiwe Buthelezi

Applicant

Lephla Sizakele Hoffman

Applicant

Nthabiseng Cynthia Xulu

Applicant

Ntomfikile Samkelisiwe Mkhize

Applicant

Lehlohonolo Cyprian Moloi

Applicant

Simangele Grace Kunene

Applicant

Moses Sipho Kevin Gumbi

Applicant

Goodwill Fukang Molefe

Applicant

Sibusiso Mandlenkosi Charles Zikode

Applicant

Nlebuheng Maureen Khanye

Applicant

Nquthu Local Municipality

Respondent

Council of Nquthu Local Municipality

Respondent

Bonginkosi Paul Gumbi

Respondent

Welcome Sakhile Mpanza

Respondent

Mpumelelo Baldwin Jiyane

Respondent

Zanele Sithole

Respondent

Richard Sikhumbuzo Langa

Respondent

Emmanuel Mbekezeli Mkhwanazi

Respondent

Mbongeni Ephraim Mnguni

Respondent

Emmanueal Lindokuhle Shabalala

Respondent

Njabulo Mbongiseni Buthelezi

Respondent

Sifiso Msalofy Buthelezi

Respondent

Sabelo Praisegod Mathe

Respondent

Fana Alfred Hletshwayo

Respondent

Siyabonga Mabilabila Kunene

Respondent

Jerry Nathi Khoza

Respondent

Joyce Zandile Ndima

Respondent

Sakhile Derrick Masimula

Respondent

Pertunia Phindile Ntombela

Respondent

Ntombikayise Goodness Mdlalose

Respondent

Mengiwe Ronit Ngobese

Respondent

Thamsanqa Abion Dlamini

Respondent

Bonginkosi Innocent Zwane

Respondent

Evelyn Thulisile Nhlebela

Respondent

Holihlahla Mntombuhle Shelembe

Respondent

Member of the Executive Council for Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs

Respondent

Member of the Executive Council for Finance and Treasury, KwaZulu-Natal

Respondent

Sithembiso Blessing Mthembu

Respondent

Nombuso Zandile Mbongwa

Respondent

Bhekani Brian Sokhulu

Respondent

ABSA Bank

Respondent

First National Bank

Respondent

The Standard Bank of South Africa

Respondent

Nedbank

Respondent

Investec Bank

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the appointments of the 28th to 30th respondents as acting municipal manager, chief financial officer, and director of planning were validly made at the council meeting of 2 September 2020.
  2. 2 Whether the council meeting of 2 September 2020 was convened in compliance with the standing rules, specifically regarding notice and agenda items.
  3. 3 Whether the counter-application by the MEC to set aside the appointment of the 10th respondent as Mayor was sustainable under the COVID-19 regulations and standing rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appointments of the 28th to 30th respondents at the council meeting of 2 September 2020 were invalid due to non-compliance with the peremptory requirements of rule 13.2 of the standing rules, which prohibits the transaction of new business at continuation meetings. The urgency cited by the municipal respondents did not afford the council discretion to bypass these rules. The court declined to set aside subsequent decisions made at the 22 September 2020 meeting, as they were not challenged in these proceedings. Regarding the counter-application, the court held that the COVID-19 regulations did not suspend special council meetings, and the procedural challenges...

Court Disposition

The main application succeeds; the first impugned decision is declared invalid. The counter-application is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The first impugned decision is declared invalid.
  • The declaration of invalidity takes effect from the date of this order.