HT Pelatona Projects (Pty) Ltd v Tswelopele Local Municipality and Others (2214/2022) [2022] ZAFSHC 97 (23 May 2022)
The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie right to interim relief, as the tender was awarded to a joint venture that did not meet the mandatory CIDB grading requirements for both civil and mechanical engineering. The evidence presented by the applicant was not disputed by the respondents, and the Bid Evaluation Committee failed to consider relevant technical reports and mandatory requirements. The urgency of the matter was accepted, given the imminent implementation of the works and the delays attributable to the first respondent. The court held that irreparable harm would result if interim relief was not granted, as the contract works might be completed before the...
- Citation
- [2022] ZAFSHC 97
- Parties
- Applicant: HT Pelatona Projects (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Tswelopele Local Municipality; Respondent: NSM Professional Services and General Projects (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Tamane Civil Construction (Pty) Ltd
- Court
- Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 23 May 2022
- Case Number
- 2214/2022
- Procedural Posture
- Urgent Application / Interim Interdict Pending Review Application
- Outcome
- Interim interdict granted; respondents interdicted from implementing the tender award pending review application; costs reserved.
- Judges
- JP Daffue
- Legal Topics
- Public Procurement, Interim Interdict, Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act, Municipal Tender Award, Bid Evaluation, Urgency in Interdicts
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
HT Pelatona Projects (Pty) Ltd
Applicant
Tswelopele Local Municipality
Respondent
NSM Professional Services and General Projects (Pty) Ltd
Respondent
Tamane Civil Construction (Pty) Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interim Interdict Pending Review Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to an interim interdict restraining implementation of the tender award pending review.
- 2 Whether the tender process complied with statutory and regulatory requirements, including CIDB grading.
- 3 Whether the application is urgent and meets the requirements for interim relief.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie right to interim relief, as the tender was awarded to a joint venture that did not meet the mandatory CIDB grading requirements for both civil and mechanical engineering. The evidence presented by the applicant was not disputed by the respondents, and the Bid Evaluation Committee failed to consider relevant technical reports and mandatory requirements. The urgency of the matter was accepted, given the imminent implementation of the works and the delays attributable to the first respondent. The court held that irreparable harm would result if interim relief was not granted, as the contract works might be completed before the...
Court Disposition
Interim interdict granted; respondents interdicted from implementing the tender award pending review application; costs reserved.
Orders
- The applicant's non-compliance with the rules of court is condoned and the application is heard as a matter of urgency in terms of Rule 6(12).
- Pending final adjudication of a review application to be instituted on or before 27 May 2022, the respondents are interdicted and restrained from implementing or acting upon the decision to award the public tender SCM/TSW/11/2021-2022:Bultfontein/Phahameng Refurbishment of Sewer Pumpstation to the joint venture of...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment