Valazone 268 CC and Others v Head of Department Mpumalanga Department of Education (49114/14) [2015] ZAGPPHC 449 (22 June 2015)

Valazone 268 CC and Others v Head of Department Mpumalanga Department of Education (49114/14) [2015] ZAGPPHC 449 (22 June 2015)

The court found that the applicant's alleged misdirections in the main judgment, if established, could justify a conclusion that there are reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The grounds raised by the applicant were considered sufficient to warrant the granting of leave to appeal, particularly given the importance of the issues relating to the reconsideration of the tender process and the interpretation of relevant legal principles. The application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal was therefore granted, with costs to be costs in the appeal.

Citation
[2015] ZAGPPHC 449
Parties
Applicant: Valazone 268 CC and Others; Respondent: Head of Department Mpumalanga Department of Education
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 June 2015
Case Number
49114/14
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal is granted. Costs are costs in the appeal.
Judges
E M Kubushi
Legal Topics
Review of Tender Award, Leave to Appeal, Reasonable Prospects of Success, Costs in Appeal
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Review of Tender Award Leave to Appeal Reasonable Prospects of Success Costs in Appeal

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Valazone 268 CC and Others

Applicant

Head of Department Mpumalanga Department of Education

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the judgment and order reviewing and setting aside the tender decision.
  2. 2 Whether the alleged misdirections in the main judgment justify the granting of leave to appeal.
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded as costs in the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's alleged misdirections in the main judgment, if established, could justify a conclusion that there are reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The grounds raised by the applicant were considered sufficient to warrant the granting of leave to appeal, particularly given the importance of the issues relating to the reconsideration of the tender process and the interpretation of relevant legal principles. The application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal was therefore granted, with costs to be costs in the appeal.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal is granted. Costs are costs in the appeal.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal is granted.
  • Costs are costs in the appeal.