Special Investigating Unit v Netshidaulu and Others (LP01/2024)
Special Investigating Unit v Netshidaulu and Others (LP01/2024) [2024] ZAST 4 (16 May 2024)
The Tribunal found that the SIU failed to meet the requirements for urgency, as its delay in instituting proceedings was unexplained and the urgency was self-created. The SIU did not establish that it would be denied substantive redress in due course. The double jeopardy defence was dismissed as it applies only to criminal proceedings, not civil actions. The Tribunal held that the decision to appoint Blackhead Consulting remains valid until reviewed and set aside, rendering any cause of action based on procurement irregularities premature. The SIU failed to establish a prima facie right to an…
Source excerpt
- Interim Interdict
- Joinder
- Urgency
- Double Jeopardy
- Oudkraal Principle
- Disciplinary Acquittal