South Africa Case Law

Special Investigating Unit v Netshidaulu and Others (LP01/2024)

Special Investigating Unit v Netshidaulu and Others (LP01/2024) [2024] ZAST 4 (16 May 2024)

Court

Special Tribunal

Case number

LP01/2024

Judge

L.T. Modiba

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

Minister of Water and Sanitation v Tonise and Others - Leave to Appeal (1274/2022)

Minister of Water and Sanitation v Tonise and Others - Leave to Appeal (1274/2022) [2023] ZAECMKHC 98 (12 September 2023)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

1274/2022

Judge

N G Beshe

The High Court granted the Minister leave to appeal against a judgment setting aside the dissolution of the Amatola Water Board and related reinstatement order.

• Principle Of Legality
• Executive Vs Administrative Action
• Review Under Common Law
• Reinstatement Of Board Members
• Oudkraal Principle
• Administrative-law

Trudon (Pty) Ltd v Joburg Water SOC Limited (24440/2019)

Trudon (Pty) Ltd v Joburg Water SOC Limited (24440/2019) [2021] ZAGPJHC 547 (1 February 2021)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

24440/2019

Judge

C I Moosa

The court held that the defendant, as a municipal entity, was required to follow proper procedures to challenge the validity of the agreement entered into with the plaintiff. The defendant's plea and counterclaim, which sought to raise the invalidity of the agreement by way of a collateral challenge, were not legally permissible in the absence of a formal application to review and set aside the agreement. The Oudekraal principle and subsequent Constitutional Court authority make clear that unlawful administrative acts remain effective until set aside by a court, and organs of state must follo…

Source excerpt

• Oudkraal Principle
• Collateral Challenge
• Public Procurement
• Municipal Finance Management Act
• Contract Enforceability
• Stare Decisis

Coal Transporters Forum v Eskom Holdings Limited and Others (42887/2017)

Coal Transporters Forum v Eskom Holdings Limited and Others (42887/2017) [2019] ZAGPPHC 76 (26 March 2019)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

42887/2017

Judge

P.A. Meyer

The court found that the applicant failed to prove that NERSA had not taken the necessary regulatory decisions regarding tariffs, prices, and terms for the PPAs. The evidence from NERSA, Eskom, and the IPPs established that generation licences were issued after public participation, and the relevant ministerial determinations were binding. The applicant conceded that its application must fail if NERSA had taken the decisions, and further acknowledged that even unlawful administrative action stands until reviewed and set aside. The court applied the Oudekraal principle, holding that both the l…

Source excerpt

• Electricity Regulation Act
• Ministerial Determinations
• Judicial Review
• Power Purchase Agreements
• Oudkraal Principle
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act

Asatico Civil and Construction (Pty) Ltd v Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (149200/2015)

Asatico Civil and Construction (Pty) Ltd v Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (149200/2015) [2016] ZAGPJHC 95 (4 May 2016)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

149200/2015

Judge

N Davis

The court found that the respondent failed to disclose any bona fide defence to resist summary judgment. The respondent's reliance on the invalidity of the administrative act awarding the contract was insufficient, as no steps were taken to review or set aside the act, and the Oudekraal principle applies. The respondent admitted the amount due and confirmed payment in writing, and the alleged defences regarding the amount claimed and unlawful instructions were either unsupported or dependent on the invalidity argument, which was rejected. The application for leave to appeal was refused as the…

Source excerpt

• Summary Judgment
• Invalid Administrative Action
• Oudkraal Principle
• Public Procurement
• Bona Fide Defence

Asatico Civil and Construction (Pty) Ltd v Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (149200/2015)

Asatico Civil and Construction (Pty) Ltd v Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (149200/2015) [2016] ZAGPJHC 3 (21 January 2016)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

149200/2015

Judge

Davis

Summary judgment was granted for a contractor against a municipality for unpaid tender work. The court rejected vague defences and applied Oudekraal principles.

• Summary Judgment
• Municipal Tender
• Invalid Administrative Action
• Oudkraal Principle
• Just And Equitable Remedy
• Contractual Liability