National Lotteries Board v South African Education and Environment Project (788/10) [2011] ZASCA 154; [2012] 1 All SA 451 (SCA); 2012 (4) SA 504 (SCA) (28 September 2011)

National Lotteries Board v South African Education and Environment Project (788/10) [2011] ZASCA 154; [2012] 1 All SA 451 (SCA); 2012 (4) SA 504 (SCA) (28 September 2011)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the National Lotteries Board unlawfully refused the funding applications by applying its guidelines rigidly and inflexibly, thereby fettering its discretion. The guidelines, while serving a useful purpose, must not be treated as immutable rules; insignificant or technical non-compliance should be condoned if the object of the guidelines is achieved. The Board failed to consider each application individually and did not justify its decisions adequately. Furthermore, the Board was not permitted to advance new reasons for refusal in its answering affidavits, as this constitutes an ex post facto rationalization and does not cure the original defect. The...

Citation
[2011] ZASCA 154
Parties
Appellant: National Lotteries Board; Appellant: Tebogo Maitse NO; Appellant: Dorcas Jafta NO; Respondent: South African Education and Environment Project; Respondent: Claremont Methodist Church Social Impact Ministry, Sikhula Sonke
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 September 2011
Case Number
788/10
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Western Cape High Court, Review and Setting Aside of Administrative Decisions
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Brand, Van Heerden, Cachalia, Shongwe, Seriti
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Guidelines in Administrative Decision Making, Duty to Give Reasons, Review of Administrative Action, Discretion and Fettering, Public Finance Management
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Guidelines in Administrative Decision Making Duty to Give Reasons Review of Administrative Action Discretion and Fettering Public Finance Management

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

National Lotteries Board

Appellant

Tebogo Maitse NO

Appellant

Dorcas Jafta NO

Appellant

South African Education and Environment Project

Respondent

Claremont Methodist Church Social Impact Ministry, Sikhula Sonke

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Western Cape High Court, Review and Setting Aside of Administrative Decisions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the National Lotteries Board lawfully refused funding applications based on rigid application of guidelines.
  2. 2 Whether the Board's duty to give reasons for administrative decisions was fulfilled.
  3. 3 Whether new reasons for refusal can be advanced in answering affidavits during review proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the National Lotteries Board unlawfully refused the funding applications by applying its guidelines rigidly and inflexibly, thereby fettering its discretion. The guidelines, while serving a useful purpose, must not be treated as immutable rules; insignificant or technical non-compliance should be condoned if the object of the guidelines is achieved. The Board failed to consider each application individually and did not justify its decisions adequately. Furthermore, the Board was not permitted to advance new reasons for refusal in its answering affidavits, as this constitutes an ex post facto rationalization and does not cure the original defect. The...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.