Ndumo v Minister of Arts and Culture N.O (CA 81/2020) [2022] ZAECGHC 22 (10 March 2022)

Ndumo v Minister of Arts and Culture N.O (CA 81/2020) [2022] ZAECGHC 22 (10 March 2022)

The court found that the process leading to the renaming of Grahamstown to Makhanda complied with the statutory requirements for public consultation and standardisation under the South African Geographical Names Council Act and PAJA. The appellant and the KGG were invited to participate in the consultative meetings but declined, undermining their opposition. The court held that the earlier processes (2007-2013) were not relevant to the new application and that the Minister's omission to notify the public of their right to object within one month did not affect the substance of the decision. Allegations of bias and procedural irregularity were not substantiated by evidence. The court...

Citation
[2022] ZAECGHC 22
Parties
Appellant: Sigidla Ndumo; Respondent: Minister of Arts and Culture N.O; Respondent: South African Geographical Names Council; Respondent: Makana Municipality
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 March 2022
Case Number
CA 81/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Dismissal of Review Application
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Judges
E Revelas, M Jolwana, L Rusi
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Public Consultation, Standardisation of Geographical Names, Procedural Fairness, Review of Administrative Action
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Public Consultation Standardisation of Geographical Names Procedural Fairness 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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sigidla Ndumo

Appellant

Minister of Arts and Culture N.O

Respondent

South African Geographical Names Council

Respondent

Makana Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Dismissal of Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the process leading to the renaming of Grahamstown to Makhanda complied with statutory requirements for public consultation.
  2. 2 Whether the Minister of Arts and Culture's decisions were reviewable under PAJA due to procedural irregularities or irrationality.
  3. 3 Whether failure to notify the public of their right to object within one month invalidated the process.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the process leading to the renaming of Grahamstown to Makhanda complied with the statutory requirements for public consultation and standardisation under the South African Geographical Names Council Act and PAJA. The appellant and the KGG were invited to participate in the consultative meetings but declined, undermining their opposition. The court held that the earlier processes (2007-2013) were not relevant to the new application and that the Minister's omission to notify the public of their right to object within one month did not affect the substance of the decision. Allegations of bias and procedural irregularity were not substantiated by evidence. The court...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs, in line with Biowatch Trust v Registrar, Genetic Resources and Others.