Rankethoa Construction v Setsoto Local Municipality (5881/2019) [2021] ZAFSHC 72 (8 March 2021)

Rankethoa Construction v Setsoto Local Municipality (5881/2019) [2021] ZAFSHC 72 (8 March 2021)

The court found that the respondent, as an organ of state, exercised administrative powers when it resolved to cancel the sale and retender the property. The respondent failed to ascertain whether the purchase price had been paid, did not provide the transferring attorney's trust account details, and did not give the applicant written notice to remedy any alleged breach as required by the Deed of Sale. The respondent also failed to communicate the cancellation directly to the applicant. These procedural and substantive failures rendered the resolution unlawful and invalid as administrative action under PAJA. The applicant provided sufficient grounds for review, and the relief sought was...

Citation
[2021] ZAFSHC 72
Parties
Applicant: Rankhethoa Construction; Respondent: Setsoto Local Municipality
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 March 2021
Case Number
5881/2019
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Unopposed Rule 53 Review; Order Granted After Respondent Filed Notice to Abide
Outcome
Application granted; respondent's resolution reviewed and set aside; costs awarded on party and party scale.
Judges
Mathebula, Majosi
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Municipal Decision Review, Deed of Sale Breach, Cancellation of Contract
Administrative Law Land and Property Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Municipal Decision Review Deed of Sale Breach Cancellation of Contract

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rankhethoa Construction

Applicant

Setsoto Local Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Unopposed Rule 53 Review; Order Granted After Respondent Filed Notice to Abide

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's resolution to revert the property to itself and retender it constituted administrative action reviewable under PAJA.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent complied with the Deed of Sale, specifically regarding payment and notice requirements before cancellation.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was afforded procedural fairness prior to the cancellation of the agreement.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent, as an organ of state, exercised administrative powers when it resolved to cancel the sale and retender the property. The respondent failed to ascertain whether the purchase price had been paid, did not provide the transferring attorney's trust account details, and did not give the applicant written notice to remedy any alleged breach as required by the Deed of Sale. The respondent also failed to communicate the cancellation directly to the applicant. These procedural and substantive failures rendered the resolution unlawful and invalid as administrative action under PAJA. The applicant provided sufficient grounds for review, and the relief sought was...

Court Disposition

Application granted; respondent's resolution reviewed and set aside; costs awarded on party and party scale.

Orders

  • The decision and/or resolution reached on 6 December 2017 by the respondent, whereby the site at Erf 1399 Ficksburg was to revert to the respondent and be retendered, is reviewed and declared unlawful, invalid, and set aside.
  • Respondent shall pay the costs of this application on a party and party scale.