Collins Sebola Financial Services (Pty) Ltd v South African Forestry Company SOC (Ltd) and Others (21375/20) [2021] ZAGPPHC 204 (12 March 2021)

Collins Sebola Financial Services (Pty) Ltd v South African Forestry Company SOC (Ltd) and Others (21375/20) [2021] ZAGPPHC 204 (12 March 2021)

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal, as required by section 17(1)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act. The applicant's argument that it reserved the right to appoint more than one service provider per region did not justify a procurement decision that contravened the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act. The delay of more than three weeks in filing heads of argument, despite the urgency of the matter, warranted a punitive costs order. The court declined to vary its previous order regarding the handover of the tender, as full argument on this aspect had not been presented by both parties.

Citation
[2021] ZAGPPHC 204
Parties
Applicant: Collins Sebola Financial Services (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: South African Forestry Company SOC Ltd; Respondent: Tsepo Mohaneng; Respondent: Clement Nhuvunga; Respondent: The Chairperson of the Bid Specification Committee of the First Respondent in respect of the RFB 011/2019; Respondent: The Chairperson of the Bid Evaluation in respect of the RFB 011/2019; Respondent: The Chairperson of the Bid Adjudication in respect of the RFB 011/2019; Respondent: Phepha MV Security Service; Respondent: The Chairperson of the Audit Committee of the First Respondent; Respondent: The Chairperson of the Financial Committee of the First Respondent; Respondent: Phuthadichaba Trading Enterprise CC
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 March 2021
Case Number
21375/20
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on 14 January 2021
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs on an attorney and client scale, including costs of senior counsel where employed.
Judges
A C Basson
Legal Topics
Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act, Leave to Appeal Threshold, Punitive Costs, Public Tender Review
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act Leave to Appeal Threshold Punitive Costs Public Tender Review

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Collins Sebola Financial Services (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

South African Forestry Company SOC Ltd

Respondent

Tsepo Mohaneng

Respondent

Clement Nhuvunga

Respondent

The Chairperson of the Bid Specification Committee of the First Respondent in respect of the RFB 011/2019

Respondent

The Chairperson of the Bid Evaluation in respect of the RFB 011/2019

Respondent

The Chairperson of the Bid Adjudication in respect of the RFB 011/2019

Respondent

Phepha MV Security Service

Respondent

The Chairperson of the Audit Committee of the First Respondent

Respondent

The Chairperson of the Financial Committee of the First Respondent

Respondent

Phuthadichaba Trading Enterprise CC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on 14 January 2021

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the judgment handed down on 14 January 2021.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's right to appoint more than one service provider per region justifies a decision contrary to the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act.
  3. 3 Whether a punitive costs order is warranted due to the applicant's delay in filing heads of argument.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal, as required by section 17(1)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act. The applicant's argument that it reserved the right to appoint more than one service provider per region did not justify a procurement decision that contravened the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act. The delay of more than three weeks in filing heads of argument, despite the urgency of the matter, warranted a punitive costs order. The court declined to vary its previous order regarding the handover of the tender, as full argument on this aspect had not been presented by both parties.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs on an attorney and client scale, including costs of senior counsel where employed.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs on an attorney and client scale, such costs to include the costs of senior counsel where so employed.