Foodcorp (PTY) Ltd v Deputy Director General - Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism: Branch Marine and Coastal Management and Others (3519/02) [2003] ZAWCHC 72; 2004 (5) BCLR 487 (C); 2004 (5) SA 91 (C) (12 December 2003)

Foodcorp (PTY) Ltd v Deputy Director General - Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism: Branch Marine and Coastal Management and Others (3519/02) [2003] ZAWCHC 72; 2004 (5) BCLR 487 (C); 2004 (5) SA 91 (C) (12 December 2003)

The court found that the first respondent's decision to allocate a single percentage quota for pilchard and anchovy was made within the policy framework of the Marine and Living Resources Act, following extensive consultation and reliance on expert advice. The decision was neither arbitrary nor unreasonable, and the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2003] ZAWCHC 72
Parties
Applicant: Foodcorp (PTY) Ltd; Respondent: Deputy Director General - Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism: Branch Marine and Coastal Management; Respondent: Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism; Respondent: The holders of rights in the pelagic fishing industry as set out in Annexure 'NM1'
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 December 2003
Case Number
3519/02
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Van Zyl
Legal Topics
Allocation of Fishing Rights, Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Ultra Vires, Procedural Fairness, Policy Deference
Administrative Law Environmental Law Allocation of Fishing Rights Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Ultra Vires Procedural Fairness Policy Deference

Source-derived case record

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Foodcorp (PTY) Ltd

Applicant

Deputy Director General - Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism: Branch Marine and Coastal Management

Respondent

Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism

Respondent

The holders of rights in the pelagic fishing industry as set out in Annexure 'NM1'

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first respondent's decision to allocate a single percentage quota for pilchard and anchovy, replacing separate quotas, was arbitrary, unreasonable, or procedurally unfair.
  2. 2 Whether the decision-maker failed to apply his mind, acted ultra vires, or improperly delegated his decision-making authority.
  3. 3 Whether the allocation process complied with the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act and the Constitution.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the first respondent's decision to allocate a single percentage quota for pilchard and anchovy was made within the policy framework of the Marine and Living Resources Act, following extensive consultation and reliance on expert advice. The decision was neither arbitrary nor unreasonable, and the first respondent applied his mind to the relevant facts and circumstances. The applicant's challenge amounted to an appeal against the substance of the decision rather than a legitimate review of the administrative process. Judicial deference was warranted given the technical complexity and policy considerations involved. The court held that there was no procedural unfairness,...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.