Wattpower Solutions CC and Another v Transnet SOC Limited and Another (D6346/2019) [2021] ZAKZDHC 46; [2022] 1 All SA 892 (KZD) (20 December 2021)

Wattpower Solutions CC and Another v Transnet SOC Limited and Another (D6346/2019) [2021] ZAKZDHC 46; [2022] 1 All SA 892 (KZD) (20 December 2021)

The court found that Transnet's due diligence investigation was lawful and not a repeat of the functionality assessment, as the tender invitation and applicable regulations permitted a further assessment of capacity and capability after the functionality stage. The applicants failed to demonstrate that the process was unfair or that the criteria applied were not objective. The extension of the tender validity period was valid, as only responsive bidders needed to be consulted, and disqualified bidders had no further interest. Even if there were irregularities, they were not material and did not prejudice the applicants. The contract had been substantially completed, and no basis existed...

Citation
[2021] ZAKZDHC 46
Parties
Applicant: Wattpower Solutions CC; Applicant: Prentec (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Transnet SOC Limited; Respondent: Murray & Dickson (Pty) Ltd
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 December 2021
Case Number
D6346/2019
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Final Judgment on Review
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs, including attorney-client costs for the second respondent.
Judges
M R Chetty
Legal Topics
Public Procurement, Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act, Due Diligence in Tender Awards, Extension of Tender Validity Period, Objective Criteria in Tender Evaluation, Disgorgement of Profits
Administrative Law Commercial and Corporate Public Procurement Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act Due Diligence in Tender Awards Extension of Tender Validity Period Objective Criteria in Tender Evaluation Disgorgement of Profits

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 32 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wattpower Solutions CC

Applicant

Prentec (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Transnet SOC Limited

Respondent

Murray & Dickson (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Final Judgment on Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Transnet acted lawfully and fairly in conducting a due diligence investigation after the applicants passed the functionality stage of the tender process.
  2. 2 Whether Transnet's extension of the tender validity period without consulting disqualified bidders rendered the procurement process invalid.
  3. 3 Whether the rejection of the applicants' bid was based on objective criteria as required by the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act and related regulations.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Transnet's due diligence investigation was lawful and not a repeat of the functionality assessment, as the tender invitation and applicable regulations permitted a further assessment of capacity and capability after the functionality stage. The applicants failed to demonstrate that the process was unfair or that the criteria applied were not objective. The extension of the tender validity period was valid, as only responsive bidders needed to be consulted, and disqualified bidders had no further interest. Even if there were irregularities, they were not material and did not prejudice the applicants. The contract had been substantially completed, and no basis existed...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs, including attorney-client costs for the second respondent.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs on a party and party scale, including costs of senior counsel for the first respondent.
  • Costs are awarded on an attorney-client scale in favour of the second respondent, including all reserved costs.