TFM Industries and Another v Marce Projects (Pty) Ltd and Another (33992/2019) [2020] ZAGPJHC 17 (30 January 2020)

TFM Industries and Another v Marce Projects (Pty) Ltd and Another (33992/2019) [2020] ZAGPJHC 17 (30 January 2020)

The court found that the interim interdict was not appealable as it did not have a final effect and merely preserved the status quo pending the expedited review of the tender award. The interests of justice did not warrant entertaining an appeal, as any prejudice to TFM Industries was outweighed by the need to maintain the integrity of the review process and ensure the review court's jurisdiction under section 172(1)(b) of the Constitution was not rendered ineffective. The court distinguished the ACSA decision, noting it did not set new precedent and was based on its own facts. Even if the interim order were appealable, there were no prospects of success on appeal, as the requirements for...

Citation
[2020] ZAGPJHC 17
Parties
Applicant: TFM Industries; Applicant: City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality; Respondent: Marcé Projects (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Marcé Fire Fighting Technology (Pty) Ltd
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 January 2020
Case Number
33992/2019
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Application for Suspension of Interim Order Under Section 18(2) and (3) of the Superior Courts Act
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs; application for suspension under section 18(2) and (3) of the Superior Courts Act dismissed with costs.
Judges
L T Modiba
Legal Topics
Interim Interdict, Appealability of Interim Orders, Superior Courts Act Section 18, Tender Review, Just and Equitable Remedy
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Interim Interdict Appealability of Interim Orders Superior Courts Act Section 18 Tender Review Just and Equitable Remedy

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TFM Industries

Applicant

City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality

Applicant

Marcé Projects (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Marcé Fire Fighting Technology (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Application for Suspension of Interim Order Under Section 18(2) and (3) of the Superior Courts Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the interim interdict granted against the implementation of the tender is appealable.
  2. 2 Whether there are prospects of success on appeal against the interim interdict.
  3. 3 Whether the application for suspension of the interim order under section 18(2) and (3) of the Superior Courts Act is competent after dismissal of leave to appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the interim interdict was not appealable as it did not have a final effect and merely preserved the status quo pending the expedited review of the tender award. The interests of justice did not warrant entertaining an appeal, as any prejudice to TFM Industries was outweighed by the need to maintain the integrity of the review process and ensure the review court's jurisdiction under section 172(1)(b) of the Constitution was not rendered ineffective. The court distinguished the ACSA decision, noting it did not set new precedent and was based on its own facts. Even if the interim order were appealable, there were no prospects of success on appeal, as the requirements for...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs; application for suspension under section 18(2) and (3) of the Superior Courts Act dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.
  • The applications in terms of section 18(2) and (3) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 are dismissed with costs.