Special Investigating Unit and Others v Lekabe (GP09/2019; GP/22/2021) [2025] ZAST 6 (4 March 2025)

Special Investigating Unit and Others v Lekabe (GP09/2019; GP/22/2021) [2025] ZAST 6 (4 March 2025)

The Tribunal found that both the 7 and 11 February 2025 third party notices were defective and irregular, as they failed to comply with the requirements of the Uniform Rules of Court and the Tribunal Rules. The respondent's attempt to use a hybrid process by combining elements of both sets of rules was impermissible. The Tribunal held that service by email alone did not satisfy the procedural requirements for third party notices, and that the applicants, as dominus litis, were entitled to receive all relevant documents. The respondent's withdrawal notice did not specify which notice was being withdrawn, creating uncertainty that necessitated the setting aside of both notices. The Tribunal...

Citation
[2025] ZAST 6
Parties
Applicant: Special Investigating Unit (SIU); Applicant: Minister of Police; Applicant: Minister of Justice and Correctional Services; Applicant: Minister of Health; Respondent: Kgosisephuthabatho Gustav Lekabe
Court
Special Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 March 2025
Case Number
GP09/2019; GP/22/2021
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application to Set Aside Irregular Third Party Notices Under Rule 30
Outcome
Application granted; both third party notices of 7 and 11 February 2025 set aside; respondent ordered to pay costs of one senior counsel.
Judges
M Victor
Legal Topics
Irregular Proceedings, Third Party Notice, Uniform Rules of Court, Special Tribunal Rules, Costs Award
Civil Procedure Irregular Proceedings Third Party Notice Uniform Rules of Court Special Tribunal Rules Costs Award

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

Special Investigating Unit (SIU)

Applicant

Minister of Police

Applicant

Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Applicant

Minister of Health

Applicant

Kgosisephuthabatho Gustav Lekabe

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Application to Set Aside Irregular Third Party Notices Under Rule 30

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's third party notices of 7 and 11 February 2025 were irregular and should be set aside.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants are entitled to costs on an attorney-client scale for the interlocutory application.
  3. 3 Whether service by email under Tribunal Rules suffices for third party notices, or if Uniform Rules of Court requirements prevail.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that both the 7 and 11 February 2025 third party notices were defective and irregular, as they failed to comply with the requirements of the Uniform Rules of Court and the Tribunal Rules. The respondent's attempt to use a hybrid process by combining elements of both sets of rules was impermissible. The Tribunal held that service by email alone did not satisfy the procedural requirements for third party notices, and that the applicants, as dominus litis, were entitled to receive all relevant documents. The respondent's withdrawal notice did not specify which notice was being withdrawn, creating uncertainty that necessitated the setting aside of both notices. The Tribunal...

Court Disposition

Application granted; both third party notices of 7 and 11 February 2025 set aside; respondent ordered to pay costs of one senior counsel.

Orders

  • The application is granted.
  • Both Notices of 7 and 11 February 2025 are hereby set aside.