Shelton and Another v Ndlambe Municipality and Others (621/2014) [2016] ZAECGHC 143 (1 December 2016)

Shelton and Another v Ndlambe Municipality and Others (621/2014) [2016] ZAECGHC 143 (1 December 2016)

The court found that the applicants, as ratepayers and residents, had locus standi to challenge the impugned decisions and agreements regarding municipal land. The applicants provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay, having only become aware of the relevant facts in 2013 after accessing information through PAIA. The application was thus brought within the time limits prescribed by section 7(1)(b) of PAJA. The court held that the first respondent failed to comply with statutory requirements for public participation and advertisement prior to the alienation of municipal property, as required by section 124 of the Ordinance. The agreements were concluded with entities not party to...

Citation
[2016] ZAECGHC 143
Parties
Applicant: Mark William Shelton; Applicant: Jonathan Andrew Campbell; Respondent: Ndlambe Municipality; Respondent: Transnet Limited; Respondent: PA River Development Company Proprietary Limited; Respondent: Pegasus Khotso Proprietary Limited
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 December 2016
Case Number
621/2014
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application granted; impugned decisions and agreements reviewed and set aside; costs awarded against first and third respondents.
Judges
N G Beshe
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Municipal Property Alienation, Environmental Rights, Locus Standi, Delay in Review, Principle of Legality
Administrative Law Land and Property Constitutional Law Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Municipal Property Alienation Environmental Rights Locus Standi Delay in Review +1 more

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark William Shelton

Applicant

Jonathan Andrew Campbell

Applicant

Ndlambe Municipality

Respondent

Transnet Limited

Respondent

PA River Development Company Proprietary Limited

Respondent

Pegasus Khotso Proprietary Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the impugned decisions and sale agreements by the first and second respondents regarding municipal land were lawful and valid.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have locus standi to bring the review application as ratepayers and residents.
  3. 3 Whether the application was brought within the time limits prescribed by section 7(1)(b) of PAJA.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants, as ratepayers and residents, had locus standi to challenge the impugned decisions and agreements regarding municipal land. The applicants provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay, having only become aware of the relevant facts in 2013 after accessing information through PAIA. The application was thus brought within the time limits prescribed by section 7(1)(b) of PAJA. The court held that the first respondent failed to comply with statutory requirements for public participation and advertisement prior to the alienation of municipal property, as required by section 124 of the Ordinance. The agreements were concluded with entities not party to...

Court Disposition

Application granted; impugned decisions and agreements reviewed and set aside; costs awarded against first and third respondents.

Orders

  • The decision of the First Respondent’s Management Committee on 19 February 2002 regarding joint marketing of erf 642 and erf 361, Port Alfred, is reviewed and set aside.
  • The resolution of the First Respondent Council on 11 July 2001 accepting the Pegasus Group proposal for development is reviewed and set aside.