Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
1 court collection
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Administrative Law [2024] ZAST 9

Special Investigating Unit v Nkhane Projects and Supply (Pty) Ltd and Another (GP 04/2023)

Special Investigating Unit v Nkhane Projects and Supply (Pty) Ltd and Another (GP 04/2023) [2024] ZAST 9 (5 August 2024)

Court
Special Tribunal
Case number
GP 04/2023
Judge
L.T. Modiba

The Tribunal found that the Gauteng Department of Health awarded contracts to Nkhane Projects and Supply (Pty) Ltd in clear violation of procurement prescripts, including the absence of a competitive bidding process, lack of proper deviation approval, and officials acting beyond their delegated authority. These uncontested irregularities rendered the contracts unlawful and invalid. The SIU's delay in bringing the application was condoned due to the seriousness of the irregularities and the interests of justice. The innocence of Nkhane as a tenderer was considered only in determining consequen…

Source excerpt

  • Legality Review
  • Public Procurement Irregularities
  • Just And Equitable Relief
  • Condonation For Delay
  • No Profit No Loss Principle
Read case analysis
Administrative Law [2022] ZAST 26

Special Investigating Unit v Mlangeni Brothers and Another (GP07/2021)

Special Investigating Unit v Mlangeni Brothers and Another (GP07/2021) [2022] ZAST 26 (14 November 2022)

Court
Special Tribunal
Case number
GP07/2021
Judge
L.T. Modiba

The Tribunal found that the contract awarded to Mlangeni Brothers was invalid due to procurement irregularities. Applying the no profit no loss principle, the Tribunal held that Mlangeni Brothers is only entitled to recover reasonable expenses incurred in supplying PPE items to the Gauteng Department of Health, not to retain any profit. The Tribunal scrutinized the Income and Expenditure Statement submitted by Mlangeni Brothers and disallowed most claimed operating expenses, including storage, security, transportation (except R4,100), accounting, legal, financing, commission, and salary costs…

Source excerpt

  • Legality Review
  • Just And Equitable Relief
  • Public Procurement Irregularities
  • No Profit No Loss Principle
  • Burden Of Proof
  • Constitutional Remedies
Read case analysis
Administrative Law [2022] ZAST 6

Special Investigating Unit and Another v Caledon River Properties(Pty) Ltd and Another (GP/17/2020)

Special Investigating Unit and Another v Caledon River Properties(Pty) Ltd and Another (GP/17/2020) [2022] ZAST 6 (8 March 2022)

Court
Special Tribunal
Case number
GP/17/2020
Judge
L.T. Modiba

The Tribunal found that both parties failed to lead evidence to substantiate their pleaded cases regarding the remedy. The applicants' claim for full repayment of prepaid amounts was inconsistent with the established no profit no loss principle in government procurement invalidity cases. The respondents did not establish exceptional circumstances justifying retention of vested rights or profits. Applying the Constitutional Court's guidance, the Tribunal held that the just and equitable remedy is to divest the respondents of any profits earned under the invalid contracts, but not to leave them…

Source excerpt

  • Government Procurement
  • Just And Equitable Remedy
  • No Profit No Loss Principle
  • Section 172 Constitution
  • Public Interest
  • Contract Invalidity
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.