Waymark Infotech (Pty) Limited v Road Traffic Management Corporation (440/2017) [2018] ZASCA 11 (6 March 2018)

Waymark Infotech (Pty) Limited v Road Traffic Management Corporation (440/2017) [2018] ZASCA 11 (6 March 2018)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that s 66 of the Public Finance Management Act does not apply to ordinary procurement contracts concluded after a proper tender process, even if they extend beyond one fiscal year, provided they do not embody loans, guarantees, or the giving of security. The contract between Waymark and RTMC was a present commitment to pay for professional services as rendered, not a future financial commitment as contemplated by s 66. The court found that requiring ministerial authorisation for all procurement contracts would be unworkable and contrary to the legislative scheme. The appeal was upheld, and the counterclaim by RTMC was dismissed.

Citation
[2018] ZASCA 11
Parties
Appellant: Waymark Infotech (Pty) Limited; Respondent: Road Traffic Management Corporation
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 March 2018
Case Number
440/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Division of the High Court, Pretoria
Outcome
Appeal upheld; order of the court a quo set aside; counterclaim dismissed with costs.
Judges
Lewis, Seriti, Mathopo, Davis, Plasket
Legal Topics
Public Finance Management Act, Future Financial Commitment, Procurement Contracts, Ministerial Authorisation
Administrative Law Commercial and Corporate Public Finance Management Act Future Financial Commitment Procurement Contracts Ministerial Authorisation

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Waymark Infotech (Pty) Limited

Appellant

Road Traffic Management Corporation

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Division of the High Court, Pretoria

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a contract for the procurement of professional services by a public entity constitutes a future financial commitment under s 66 of the Public Finance Management Act.
  2. 2 Whether ministerial authorisation is required for such procurement contracts to be valid and enforceable.
  3. 3 Whether the contract between Waymark and RTMC was invalid for lack of compliance with s 66(3)(c) of the Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that s 66 of the Public Finance Management Act does not apply to ordinary procurement contracts concluded after a proper tender process, even if they extend beyond one fiscal year, provided they do not embody loans, guarantees, or the giving of security. The contract between Waymark and RTMC was a present commitment to pay for professional services as rendered, not a future financial commitment as contemplated by s 66. The court found that requiring ministerial authorisation for all procurement contracts would be unworkable and contrary to the legislative scheme. The appeal was upheld, and the counterclaim by RTMC was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; order of the court a quo set aside; counterclaim dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with costs.
  • The order of the court a quo is set aside and substituted with: 'The counterclaim is dismissed with costs.'