South Africa Case Law

Special Investigating Unit and Another v Kroucamp Plumbers (Pty) Ltd and Another (WC01/2024)

Special Investigating Unit and Another v Kroucamp Plumbers (Pty) Ltd and Another (WC01/2024) [2025] ZAST 10 (13 June 2025)

Court

Special Tribunal

Case number

WC01/2024

Judge

D. Makhoba

The Special Tribunal set aside two public tenders to Kroucamp Plumbers, granted condonation for late filing, pierced the corporate veil, and dismissed the counterclaim.

• Public Procurement Irregularities
• Fraudulent Misrepresentation
• Piercing Corporate Veil
• Unjustified Enrichment
• Condonation For Delay
• Conflict Of Interest

ML Nkosi Electrical Contractors CC and Another v Ba-Phalaborwa Local Municipality (Appeal) (HCAA40/2023)

ML Nkosi Electrical Contractors CC and Another v Ba-Phalaborwa Local Municipality (Appeal) (HCAA40/2023) [2025] ZALMPPHC 85 (25 April 2025)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

HCAA40/2023

Judges

Bresler AJ, Naude-Odendaal J, Du Plessis AJ

The court found that the award of Tender 06/2012 to the appellants was unlawful and invalid due to procedural irregularities and non-compliance with statutory and constitutional procurement requirements. Despite the respondent's delay in instituting self-review proceedings, the importance of upholding the rule of law and legality outweighed the delay. Both parties had performed under the contract, and there was no evidence of fraud or bad faith by the appellants. The court held that, although the contract must be declared invalid, justice and equity require that the appellants not be deprived…

Source excerpt

• Municipal Tender Review
• Unlawful Contract
• Delay In Self Review
• Just And Equitable Remedy
• Section 172 Constitution
• Public Procurement Irregularities

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

Special Investigating Unit v Minister of Correctional Services and Others (GP08/2019)

Special Investigating Unit v Minister of Correctional Services and Others (GP08/2019) [2024] ZAST 7 (29 July 2024)

Court

Special Tribunal

Case number

GP08/2019

Judge

L.T. Modiba

The Tribunal found that the procurement processes for tenders DCSSF01 and DCSSF02 were fundamentally irregular, contravening statutory and regulatory requirements, including fiscal dumping and non-compliance with National Treasury Regulations and the PFMA. The appointment of service providers was tainted by single sourcing without proper approval, misrepresentation, and excessive payments. The Tribunal confirmed its jurisdiction to adjudicate legality reviews and the SIU's locus standi. The opposing respondents' points in limine were dismissed as lacking merit. The Tribunal held that the decl…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement Irregularities
• Fiscal Dumping
• Just And Equitable Relief
• Setting Aside Tender Awards
• Locus Standi
• Declaration Of Invalidity

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

Siyangena Technologies (Pty) Ltd v PRASA and Others (487/2021)

Siyangena Technologies (Pty) Ltd v PRASA and Others (487/2021) [2022] ZASCA 149; [2023] 1 All SA 74 (SCA); 2023 (2) SA 51 (SCA) (1 November 2022)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

487/2021

Judges

Ponnan, Van der Merwe, Plasket, Chetty, Salie-Hlope

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the procurement contracts between PRASA and Siyangena were constitutionally invalid due to pervasive irregularities and corruption in the procurement process. The delay in PRASA's self-review application was condoned, as the new Board acted reasonably once the true extent of the malfeasance was uncovered. Siyangena was found not to be an innocent party, but complicit or at least a beneficiary of the irregularities. The remedial order for an independent engineer to assess the value of works was upheld as a just and equitable remedy, ensuring neither party…

Source excerpt

• Legality Review
• Public Procurement Irregularities
• Just And Equitable Remedy
• Delay Condonation
• Remedial Discretion
• Costs Sanction

Special Investigating Unit and Another v Maczola Tours CC and Others (NW01/2020)

Special Investigating Unit and Another v Maczola Tours CC and Others (NW01/2020) [2022] ZAST 24 (19 October 2022)

Court

Special Tribunal

Case number

NW01/2020

Judge

L.T. Modiba

The Special Tribunal held that the scholar transport claim had not prescribed and that the first respondent likely inflated kilometre claims, but required further proof of the amount.

• Public Procurement Irregularities
• Prescription Act Application
• Joint And Several Liability
• Scholar Transport Tender
• Special Investigating Unit
• Monetary Relief

Special Investigation Unit v Chachulani Group Investment Holdings and Others (GP15/2021)

Special Investigation Unit v Chachulani Group Investment Holdings and Others (GP15/2021) [2021] ZAST 1 (14 August 2021)

Court

Special Tribunal

Case number

GP15/2021

Judge

L T Modiba

The Special Tribunal has jurisdiction to grant just and equitable relief, including the disgorgement of profits, under section 172(1)(b) of the Constitution. The no-profit principle is not limited to cases where invalidity is suspended; it applies generally to prevent parties from profiting from unlawful contracts. The SIU did not delay unduly in bringing the application, and urgency was established due to the risk of dissipation of funds once FIC directives expired. The ex parte procedure was appropriate given the risk of further dissipation, and the omission of a return date did not prejudi…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement Irregularities
• Preservation Orders
• No Profit Principle
• Urgency
• Ex Parte Procedure
• Jurisdiction Of Special Tribunal

Botha NO and Another v National Director of Public Prosecutions (920/2017)

Botha NO and Another v National Director of Public Prosecutions (920/2017) [2018] ZASCA 146 (11 October 2018)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

920/2017

Judges

Majiedt, Swain, Mathopo, Schippers, Mokgohloa

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the deceased, in her capacity as Head of Department, deliberately breached procurement regulations to favour Trifecta, resulting in the award of lucrative leases. In exchange, Trifecta paid for extensive renovations to her property and transferred shares to a trust benefiting her family. The evidence demonstrated that the purported loan agreement was fabricated after the fact to conceal the true nature of the renovations as gratification for corrupt activities. Both the renovations and the shares constituted proceeds of unlawful activities, namely corrup…

Source excerpt

• Prevention Of Organised Crime Act
• Forfeiture Of Proceeds
• Corruption
• Money Laundering
• Proportionality Enquiry
• Public Procurement Irregularities

National Director of Public Prosecutions v Botha and Another (1825/2012)

National Director of Public Prosecutions v Botha and Another (1825/2012) [2016] ZANCHC 89 (29 July 2016)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

1825/2012

Judge

Mamosebo

The High Court ordered forfeiture of Kimberley property and trust shares, finding they were linked to corruption and money laundering involving Trifecta and Ms Botha.

• Prevention Of Organised Crime Act
• Corruption
• Money Laundering
• Forfeiture Of Property
• Conflict Of Interest
• Public Procurement Irregularities