Waters Firearm Training and Assessment Centre CC t/a Firearm Competency Assessment and Training Centre and Others v National Commissioner of the South African Police Services and Others (68285/13) [2014] ZAGPPHC 410 (20 February 2014)

Waters Firearm Training and Assessment Centre CC t/a Firearm Competency Assessment and Training Centre and Others v National Commissioner of the South African Police Services and Others (68285/13) [2014] ZAGPPHC 410 (20 February 2014)

The Court found that the Fourth Respondent, as the statutory quality assurance body, had the power to delegate and subsequently revoke quality assurance functions from the Third Respondent and to transfer these functions to the Fifth Respondent. The delegation to the Third Respondent was expressly subject to conditions, including expiry upon withdrawal by the Fourth Respondent. The Third Respondent did not contest the withdrawal nor did the Applicants pursue any appeal or review. Consequently, after the expiry of the delegation and the transition period, the Second Respondent was entitled to refuse proficiency and training certificates issued by the Applicants, as only certificates from...

Citation
[2014] ZAGPPHC 410
Parties
Applicant: Waters Firearm Training and Assessment Centre CC t/a Firearm Competency Assessment and Training Centre; Applicant: Ntate Aviation and Security Training CC; Applicant: Ye-Sizwe Security Services CC; Applicant: Unlimited Business Upliftment Trading Units (Pty) Limited; Respondent: National Commissioner of the South African Police Services; Respondent: Divisional Commissioner: Visible Policing of the South African Police Services; Respondent: Safety and Security Sector Education and Training Authority (SASSETA); Respondent: Quality Council for Trade and Occupations (QCTO); Respondent: South African Professional Firearms Trainers Council (SAPFTC)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 February 2014
Case Number
68285/13
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Interdict Application
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs, including reserved costs.
Judges
Basson
Legal Topics
Delegation of Statutory Powers, Accreditation of Training Providers, Firearm Control Act Compliance, Quality Assurance in Education
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Delegation of Statutory Powers Accreditation of Training Providers Firearm Control Act Compliance Quality Assurance in Education

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

Waters Firearm Training and Assessment Centre CC t/a Firearm Competency Assessment and Training Centre

Applicant

Ntate Aviation and Security Training CC

Applicant

Ye-Sizwe Security Services CC

Applicant

Unlimited Business Upliftment Trading Units (Pty) Limited

Applicant

National Commissioner of the South African Police Services

Respondent

Divisional Commissioner: Visible Policing of the South African Police Services

Respondent

Safety and Security Sector Education and Training Authority (SASSETA)

Respondent

Quality Council for Trade and Occupations (QCTO)

Respondent

South African Professional Firearms Trainers Council (SAPFTC)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Final Interdict Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Second Respondent is entitled to refuse proficiency and training certificates issued by the Applicants after the withdrawal of accreditation by the Third Respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the Applicants are entitled to a final interdict compelling the Second Respondent to accept certificates issued by them until expiry of their previous accreditation.
  3. 3 Whether the Fourth Respondent lawfully delegated and subsequently revoked quality assurance functions from the Third Respondent to the Fifth Respondent.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the Fourth Respondent, as the statutory quality assurance body, had the power to delegate and subsequently revoke quality assurance functions from the Third Respondent and to transfer these functions to the Fifth Respondent. The delegation to the Third Respondent was expressly subject to conditions, including expiry upon withdrawal by the Fourth Respondent. The Third Respondent did not contest the withdrawal nor did the Applicants pursue any appeal or review. Consequently, after the expiry of the delegation and the transition period, the Second Respondent was entitled to refuse proficiency and training certificates issued by the Applicants, as only certificates from...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs, including reserved costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs, inclusive of reserved costs.