Thulo v Nala Local Municipality (2840/2023) [2025] ZAFSHC 75 (12 March 2025)

Thulo v Nala Local Municipality (2840/2023) [2025] ZAFSHC 75 (12 March 2025)

The court found that the council's resolution terminating the applicant's acting appointment constituted administrative action as defined by PAJA. However, the applicant failed to institute review proceedings within the 180-day period prescribed by section 7(1) of PAJA, having waited eight months after receiving the termination letter without providing any explanation or seeking condonation for the delay. The court held that absent compliance with PAJA's timeframes, the application could not succeed. The applicant's entitlement to acting allowance and other relief was rendered moot by the failure to properly review the administrative action. The court dismissed the main application with...

Citation
[2025] ZAFSHC 75
Parties
Applicant: Majoe Thulo; Respondent: Nala Local Municipality
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 March 2025
Case Number
2840/2023
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Main application dismissed with costs; no cost order on conditional counter-application.
Judges
Reinders
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Municipal Manager Appointment, Judicial Review Delay, Acting Allowance Claim, Non Joinder, Lis Pendens
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Land and Property Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Municipal Manager Appointment Judicial Review Delay Acting Allowance Claim Non Joinder +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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Majoe Thulo

Applicant

Nala Local Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the termination of the applicant's acting appointment as Director Community Services was unlawful and invalid.
  2. 2 Whether the council's resolution terminating the acting appointment constituted administrative action subject to review under PAJA.
  3. 3 Whether the application for review was instituted within the timeframes prescribed by section 7(1) of PAJA.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the council's resolution terminating the applicant's acting appointment constituted administrative action as defined by PAJA. However, the applicant failed to institute review proceedings within the 180-day period prescribed by section 7(1) of PAJA, having waited eight months after receiving the termination letter without providing any explanation or seeking condonation for the delay. The court held that absent compliance with PAJA's timeframes, the application could not succeed. The applicant's entitlement to acting allowance and other relief was rendered moot by the failure to properly review the administrative action. The court dismissed the main application with...

Court Disposition

Main application dismissed with costs; no cost order on conditional counter-application.

Orders

  • The main application is dismissed with costs, such costs to be taxed on scale B.
  • There shall be no cost order in relation to the conditional counter-application.