Tshopo and Others v S (A60/08) [2011] ZAFSHC 114; 2013 (1) SACR 127 (FB) (17 June 2011)

Tshopo and Others v S (A60/08) [2011] ZAFSHC 114; 2013 (1) SACR 127 (FB) (17 June 2011)

The court found that the first appellant was more 'connected' to Abelusi than the declared partners, having managed its finances, opened accounts, and failed to disclose his employment and marital relationship with the MEC. The failure to declare these relationships in the tender application constituted misrepresentation and resulted in prejudice to other tenderers and the public, frustrating the state's efforts to eliminate favoritism. The third appellant knowingly allowed his business and tax certificate to be used in the fraudulent tender process. The trial court correctly exercised its discretion in sentencing, considering all relevant factors, and there was no basis for interference...

Citation
[2011] ZAFSHC 114
Parties
Appellant: S. J Tshopo; Appellant: N. M Nqulo; Appellant: N. D Makhathini; Respondent: The State
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 June 2011
Case Number
A60/08
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence After Leave Granted by Petition
Outcome
Appeal dismissed. Convictions and sentences confirmed.
Judges
Cillié, Moloi
Legal Topics
Fraud, Misrepresentation, Declaration of Interest, Prejudice, Sentencing Discretion
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Fraud Misrepresentation Declaration of Interest Prejudice Sentencing Discretion

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

S. J Tshopo

Appellant

N. M Nqulo

Appellant

N. D Makhathini

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence After Leave Granted by Petition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants committed fraud by failing to disclose required relationships in the tender process.
  2. 2 Whether there was misrepresentation resulting in actual or potential prejudice to the Department of Education or other tenderers.
  3. 3 Whether the first appellant was 'connected' to Abelusi for the purposes of the tender requirements.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the first appellant was more 'connected' to Abelusi than the declared partners, having managed its finances, opened accounts, and failed to disclose his employment and marital relationship with the MEC. The failure to declare these relationships in the tender application constituted misrepresentation and resulted in prejudice to other tenderers and the public, frustrating the state's efforts to eliminate favoritism. The third appellant knowingly allowed his business and tax certificate to be used in the fraudulent tender process. The trial court correctly exercised its discretion in sentencing, considering all relevant factors, and there was no basis for interference...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed. Convictions and sentences confirmed.

Orders

  • The appeal of all three appellants is dismissed.
  • The convictions and sentences imposed by the trial court are confirmed.