South Africa Case Law

Garden Route District Municipality v Mqota-Tshiki (C521/2022)

Garden Route District Municipality v Mqota-Tshiki (C521/2022) [2024] ZALCCT 46 (8 October 2024)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

C 521/2022

Judge

Daniels

The Court found that the review application was brought within a reasonable time and condonation was granted. On the merits, the appeal chairperson's decision to reinstate the employee, who was found guilty of fraud and gross dishonesty and breach of the municipal code of conduct, was irrational and unreasonable. The seriousness of the misconduct, the lack of remorse, and the breach of statutory and policy frameworks warranted dismissal. The appeal chairperson failed to properly apply her mind to the sanction and did not adequately consider the aggravating factors. Dismissal is the only appro…

Source excerpt

• Review Of Internal Disciplinary Decision
• Fraud And Gross Dishonesty
• Municipal Code Of Conduct
• Supply Chain Management Policy
• Condonation For Late Filing

Malawu v MEC for Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Eastern Cape and Another (CA & R 118/2021)

Malawu v MEC for Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Eastern Cape and Another (CA & R 118/2021) [2022] ZAECMKHC 27 (31 May 2022)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

CA & R 118/2021

Judges

S Mbenenge, B R Tokota, V P Noncembu

The High Court held the councillor-removal appeal was moot after a new council was elected, and ordered costs only from that date onward.

• Municipal Code Of Conduct
• Removal Of Councillor
• Mootness
• Principle Of Legality
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Municipal-governance

Khoza v Premier of Kwazulu-Natal and Others (8641/08)

Khoza v Premier of Kwazulu-Natal and Others (8641/08) [2008] ZAKZHC 52 (15 July 2008)

Court

High Courts - Kwazulu Natal

Case number

8641/08

Judge

Ntshangase

The court found that the intervention by the Executive Council under section 139(1)(b) of the Constitution was unlawful, as the charges against the applicant did not relate to any failure by the municipality to fulfil executive obligations or to service delivery issues. The disciplinary inquiry and removal from office were not justified under section 139(1)(b), and the MEC failed to exercise his own discretion as required by Item 14(6) of the Municipal Systems Act. The applicant was entitled to challenge his removal independently of the inquiry's establishment, and his participation did not a…

Source excerpt

• Municipal Code Of Conduct
• Provincial Executive Intervention
• Section 139 Constitution
• Disciplinary Procedure
• Interim Interdict