Ngamole v South African Social Security Agency, Motshwaiwa v South African Social Security Agency, Letebele v South African Social Security Agency; Matlaopane v South African Social Security Agency; Modise v South African Social Security Agency (1033/08, 1025/08, 1024/08, 1038/08, 1039/08) [2008] ZANWHC 35 (18 September 2008)

Ngamole v South African Social Security Agency, Motshwaiwa v South African Social Security Agency, Letebele v South African Social Security Agency; Matlaopane v South African Social Security Agency; Modise v South African Social Security Agency (1033/08, 1025/08, 1024/08, 1038/08, 1039/08) [2008] ZANWHC 35 (18 September 2008)

The court found that the applicants had advanced sufficient reasons for their delay and demonstrated good prospects of success, warranting condonation of non-compliance with statutory time frames. The respondent's reliance on the Meat Safety Act was misplaced and indicative of mass reproduction of affidavits. The applicants had supplied valid powers of attorney, and the respondent's assertion to the contrary was false. The respondent failed to communicate the outcome of the grant applications, and only through the litigation process did the applicants learn of the refusals. The respondent's conduct in failing to communicate decisions and opposing the applications without merit justified a...

Citation
[2008] ZANWHC 35
Parties
Applicant: Kebogile Lobisa Ngamole; Applicant: Mantwa Klaas Motshwaiwa; Applicant: Klaas Baodigile Letebele; Applicant: Mosachwamarope Lizzy Matlaopane; Applicant: Itateng Johannes Modise; Respondent: South African Social Security Agency
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 September 2008
Case Number
1033/08, 1025/08, 1024/08, 1038/08, 1039/08
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Opposed Motion for Mandatory Relief
Outcome
Applications granted. Condonation for non-compliance with time frames. Respondent ordered to provide full written reasons for refusal and to pay costs on an attorney and client scale.
Judges
R D Hendricks
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Institution of Legal Proceedings Against Organs of State Act, Condonation of Non Compliance, Written Reasons for Administrative Action, Costs on Attorney and Client Scale
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Institution of Legal Proceedings Against Organs of State Act Condonation of Non Compliance Written Reasons for Administrative Action Costs on Attorney and Client Scale

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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kebogile Lobisa Ngamole

Applicant

Mantwa Klaas Motshwaiwa

Applicant

Klaas Baodigile Letebele

Applicant

Mosachwamarope Lizzy Matlaopane

Applicant

Itateng Johannes Modise

Applicant

South African Social Security Agency

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Opposed Motion for Mandatory Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to be informed of the outcome of their social grant applications.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent was obliged to provide written reasons for the refusal of the grant applications.
  3. 3 Whether non-compliance with statutory time frames should be condoned.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had advanced sufficient reasons for their delay and demonstrated good prospects of success, warranting condonation of non-compliance with statutory time frames. The respondent's reliance on the Meat Safety Act was misplaced and indicative of mass reproduction of affidavits. The applicants had supplied valid powers of attorney, and the respondent's assertion to the contrary was false. The respondent failed to communicate the outcome of the grant applications, and only through the litigation process did the applicants learn of the refusals. The respondent's conduct in failing to communicate decisions and opposing the applications without merit justified a...

Court Disposition

Applications granted. Condonation for non-compliance with time frames. Respondent ordered to provide full written reasons for refusal and to pay costs on an attorney and client scale.

Orders

  • Condonation is granted for the non-compliance with the time frames.
  • The respondent is ordered to provide the applicants' attorney with full written reasons for the decisions to refuse the applicants' applications within fifteen (15) days of the date of this order.