South Africa Case Law

Special Investigating Unit v Helicopter and Airplane Logistical Operations (Pty) Ltd and Others (GP07/2023)

Special Investigating Unit v Helicopter and Airplane Logistical Operations (Pty) Ltd and Others (GP07/2023) [2025] ZAST 8 (5 June 2025)

Court

Special Tribunal

Case number

GP07/2023

Judge

Mashile

The Tribunal found that the procurement process for the award and extension of the contract to the joint venture was materially irregular and unlawful. The advertised tender period was changed from 12 months to 3 years after bid closure, limiting competition and violating transparency and fairness. Committee members were not properly appointed in writing, and the construction component failed to comply with CIDB registration and advertising requirements. The contract extension was unauthorised and not approved by the Accounting Officer. These irregularities contravened section 217 of the Cons…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement
• Irregular Award Of Tender
• Self Review
• Construction Industry Development Board
• Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act
• Just And Equitable Remedy

My Pride Smile Africa (Pty) Ltd and Another v Umzimvubu Local Municipality (2313/2022)

My Pride Smile Africa (Pty) Ltd and Another v Umzimvubu Local Municipality (2313/2022) [2023] ZAECMKHC 44 (6 April 2023)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

2313/2022

Judge

G H Bloem

The court found that the applicants' reliance on section 217 of the Constitution, the Public Finance Management Act, Treasury Regulations, and the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act was misplaced, as these do not apply to municipalities in the context of procurement of construction services. The CIDB Standard allows for the charging of a non-refundable fee for tender documents, provided it is limited to the actual cost of printing, and requires an attempt to make documents available on the website. The municipality failed to attempt to make the documents available online but this o…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Municipal Procurement
• Construction Industry Development Board
• Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act
• Judicial Review
• Costs Order

Waco Africa (PTY) Limited t/a SGB-Cape v Eskom SOC Limited and Others; TMS Group Industrial Service (PTY) Limited v Eskom SOC Limited and Others; Southey Contracting (PTY) Limited v Eskom SOC Limited and Others (5798/2021; 290/2022; 3047/2022)

Waco Africa (PTY) Limited t/a SGB-Cape v Eskom SOC Limited and Others; TMS Group Industrial Service (PTY) Limited v Eskom SOC Limited and Others; Southey Contracting (PTY) Limited v Eskom SOC Limited and Others (5798/2021; 290/2022; 3047/2022) [2022] ZAGPJHC 631 (2 September 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

5798/2021; 290/2022; 3047/2022

Judge

L R Adams

The court found that Eskom's procurement process and the subsequent award of the tender complied with the constitutional and legislative framework governing public procurement. The ITT expressly authorised the cluster allocation strategy, and awarding contracts to multiple bidders did not contravene the PPPFA or the Constitution. Functionality and capacity were properly assessed through objective criteria and site inspections. The PPPFA regulations were valid at the relevant time due to the suspension of the declaration of invalidity. The tender validity period was authorised and did not prej…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Public Procurement
• Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act
• Construction Industry Development Board
• Judicial Review
• Tender Allocation

Rekhuditse Cleaning and Construction Services CC v Elias Motsoaledi Local Municipality and Another (7460/2019)

Rekhuditse Cleaning and Construction Services CC v Elias Motsoaledi Local Municipality and Another (7460/2019) [2020] ZALMPPHC 52 (11 June 2020)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

7460/2019

Judge

GC Muller

The court found that the first respondent's unilateral letter of 3 April 2017 did not lawfully terminate or suspend the appointment of the second respondent as adjudicator, as the CIDB Procedure document requires joint action and prescribed procedures for such termination. The applicant's attorney's response did not constitute acquiescence or waiver of rights. Neither party invoked the relevant clauses to appoint a replacement adjudicator or set aside the award. The final adjudication award dated 26 April 2017 was valid and enforceable, as it was delivered before any replacement adjudicator w…

Source excerpt

• Construction Industry Development Board
• Adjudication Award Enforcement
• Contract Of Mandate
• Declaratory Relief
• Res Judicata
• Performance Guarantee

Icon Construction (Pty) Ltd v Dihlabeng Local Municipality and Others (A90/2015)

Icon Construction (Pty) Ltd v Dihlabeng Local Municipality and Others (A90/2015) [2015] ZAFSHC 205 (10 September 2015)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A90/2015

Judges

S Naidoo, C Reinders

High Court review of a municipal tender award set aside for CIDB non-compliance, late document acceptance, and other procurement irregularities.

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Municipal Supply Chain Management
• Tender Irregularity
• Preferential Procurement
• Construction Industry Development Board
• Judicial Review