Viva Engineering Project CC and Another v Minister of Water Affairs and Others (64340/13) [2015] ZAGPPHC 254 (17 March 2015)

Viva Engineering Project CC and Another v Minister of Water Affairs and Others (64340/13) [2015] ZAGPPHC 254 (17 March 2015)

The court found that the applicants lacked locus standi as a joint venture because the bid documents did not reflect a valid joint venture bid; rather, Corro-Wear was the sole tenderer. The Committee's decision to disqualify Viva Engineering Project CC was based on the peremptory conditions of SBD9, which prohibits collusive tendering between bidders. The Committee's error in interpreting the Competition Act was not material, as the disqualification was justified under SBD9. The administrative process was not irregular or procedurally unfair, and the applicants failed to prove grounds for judicial review under PAJA. The application was dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2015] ZAGPPHC 254
Parties
Applicant: Viva Engineering Project CC; Applicant: Viva and Corro-Wear Joint Venture; Respondent: Minister of Water Affairs; Respondent: Mrs Z Mathe NO; Respondent: Methabica Consulting; Respondent: Stellenbosch Naco; Respondent: Belta Services; Respondent: Pro-Electro Services
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 March 2015
Case Number
64340/13
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judicial Review of Administrative Tender Disqualification Under PAJA
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
A B Rossouw
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, State Procurement, Bid Disqualification, Collusive Tendering, Locus Standi
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Promotion of Administrative Justice Act State Procurement Bid Disqualification Collusive Tendering Locus Standi

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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Viva Engineering Project CC

Applicant

Viva and Corro-Wear Joint Venture

Applicant

Minister of Water Affairs

Respondent

Mrs Z Mathe NO

Respondent

Methabica Consulting

Respondent

Stellenbosch Naco

Respondent

Belta Services

Respondent

Pro-Electro Services

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judicial Review of Administrative Tender Disqualification Under PAJA

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants had locus standi to bring the review application as a joint venture.
  2. 2 Whether the Departmental Bid Evaluation Committee's decision to disqualify Viva Engineering Project CC and the Joint Venture from the tender process was reviewable under PAJA.
  3. 3 Whether the Committee's reliance on SBD9 (Certificate of Independent Bid Determination) and the Competition Act was a material error of law.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants lacked locus standi as a joint venture because the bid documents did not reflect a valid joint venture bid; rather, Corro-Wear was the sole tenderer. The Committee's decision to disqualify Viva Engineering Project CC was based on the peremptory conditions of SBD9, which prohibits collusive tendering between bidders. The Committee's error in interpreting the Competition Act was not material, as the disqualification was justified under SBD9. The administrative process was not irregular or procedurally unfair, and the applicants failed to prove grounds for judicial review under PAJA. The application was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.