Stern and Another v Health Professions Council of SA and Others (57540/2015) [2017] ZAGPPHC 284 (2 June 2017)

Stern and Another v Health Professions Council of SA and Others (57540/2015) [2017] ZAGPPHC 284 (2 June 2017)

The court held that the applicants failed to exhaust internal remedies as required by regulation 11 and section 7(2) of PAJA before approaching the court for judicial review of the professional conduct committee's decision of 23 January 2015. The application was premature and destined to be struck off the roll. Regarding the decisions of 25 February 2010 and 28 June 2011, the court found that the applicants delayed unreasonably in bringing the review application, far exceeding the 180-day period prescribed by PAJA, and failed to apply for condonation or extension of time. The court rejected the argument that the preliminary inquiry committee was functus officio, holding that its decisions...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 284
Parties
Applicant: Dr D M Stern; Applicant: Dr J.H.D.J. Brummer; Respondent: Health Professions Council of SA; Respondent: Medical and Dental Professions Board; Respondent: Registrar of the HPCSA; Respondent: Pro-forma Complainant
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 June 2017
Case Number
57540/2015
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review and Preliminary Objections
Outcome
Application struck off the roll; costs awarded against the applicants.
Judges
Legodi
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Functus Officio, Delay in Review, Internal Remedies, Procedural Fairness
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Functus Officio Delay in Review Internal Remedies Procedural Fairness

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr D M Stern

Applicant

Dr J.H.D.J. Brummer

Applicant

Health Professions Council of SA

Respondent

Medical and Dental Professions Board

Respondent

Registrar of the HPCSA

Respondent

Pro-forma Complainant

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review and Preliminary Objections

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants were required to exhaust internal remedies before approaching the court for judicial review.
  2. 2 Whether the application for review was brought within the prescribed time limits under PAJA.
  3. 3 Whether the preliminary inquiry committee was functus officio after its initial decision.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicants failed to exhaust internal remedies as required by regulation 11 and section 7(2) of PAJA before approaching the court for judicial review of the professional conduct committee's decision of 23 January 2015. The application was premature and destined to be struck off the roll. Regarding the decisions of 25 February 2010 and 28 June 2011, the court found that the applicants delayed unreasonably in bringing the review application, far exceeding the 180-day period prescribed by PAJA, and failed to apply for condonation or extension of time. The court rejected the argument that the preliminary inquiry committee was functus officio, holding that its decisions...

Court Disposition

Application struck off the roll; costs awarded against the applicants.

Orders

  • The application is struck off from the roll for reasons articulated in the judgment.
  • The applicants are to pay the costs of the application.