South Africa Case Law

Minister of Water and Sanitation v Public Protector of the Republic of South Africa and Another (A235/2022; 36050/2019)

Minister of Water and Sanitation v Public Protector of the Republic of South Africa and Another (A235/2022; 36050/2019) [2024] ZAGPPHC 612 (8 July 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A235/2022; 36050/2019

Judges

Ntuli AJ, Millar J, Ceylon AJ

The High Court upheld the appeal, setting aside the Public Protector’s report for procedural unfairness and irrational findings against former Minister Nkwinti.

• Public Protector Act
• Executive Ethics Code
• Principle Of Legality
• Natural Justice
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Public-protector-act

Macdonald v Minister of Human Settlement, Water and Sanitation (80277/2019)

Macdonald v Minister of Human Settlement, Water and Sanitation (80277/2019) [2024] ZAGPPHC 511 (30 May 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

80277/2019

Judge

MBONGWE

The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal against an order setting aside the Public Protector’s findings about a water licence dispute.

• Public Protector Act
• Locus Standi
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Settlement Agreement
• Locus-standi
• Public-protector

Air Chefs SOC Limited v Public Protector of the Republic of South Africa and Others (31083/2020)

Air Chefs SOC Limited v Public Protector of the Republic of South Africa and Others (31083/2020) [2024] ZAGPJHC 47 (26 January 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

31083/2020

Judge

Adams

The court found that Air Chefs' withdrawal of the tender award to Mantelli's constituted unlawful administrative action and maladministration. The Public Protector's findings and remedial action were rationally connected to the facts and lawful under the legality doctrine. However, there was no credible evidence of dishonesty or fraud by Air Chefs or SAA officials, and thus no basis for awarding damages beyond reimbursement of proven out-of-pocket expenses. The Public Protector acted within her powers, and her failure to refer the matter for criminal prosecution was justified given the lack o…

Source excerpt

• Public Protector Act
• Judicial Review
• Maladministration
• Remedial Action
• Legality Doctrine
• Irrationality

Lekwene and Another v Public Protector of South Africa and Others (1303/2021)

Lekwene and Another v Public Protector of South Africa and Others (1303/2021) [2022] ZANCHC 22 (7 March 2022)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

1303/2021

Judges

Mamosebo, SL Erasmus

The court found that the Public Protector acted outside her powers by broadening the scope of her investigation beyond the original complaint and failed to conduct a full, unbiased and proper investigation. The Public Protector did not consider relevant evidence, including the context of the secondment and appointment of Mr Mothibi, and failed to engage with key stakeholders. The remedial action ordered was not authorised in law, as the Premier does not have disciplinary powers over an MEC, and the Public Protector did not afford the applicants a fair hearing regarding the contemplated remedi…

Source excerpt

• Public Protector Act
• Executive Ethics Code
• Remedial Action
• Audi Alteram Partem
• Legality Principle
• Judicial Review

Rabie and Another v Public Protector and Another; Rabie v Mkhwebane and Others (56029/2018; 83971/2019)

Rabie and Another v Public Protector and Another; Rabie v Mkhwebane and Others (56029/2018; 83971/2019) [2021] ZAGPPHC 501 (3 August 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

56029/2018; 83971/2019

Judge

Janse van Nieuwenhuizen

The review application was dismissed due to non-compliance with section 7(1) of PAJA, as Rabie instituted proceedings more than four years after becoming aware of the Public Protector's report and failed to seek condonation for the delay. The declaratory relief sought was legally untenable, as Rabie failed to specify which statutory duties were breached and did not provide evidence to support allegations of extortion, theft, or criminality. Rabie had exhausted his remedies regarding the Public Protector's investigation, and the court found no basis for further intervention. The relief sought…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Public Protector Act
• Judicial Review Delay
• Costs Orders
• Mandatory Interdict

Dlamini v Public Protector of South Africa and Others (11097/2018)

Dlamini v Public Protector of South Africa and Others (11097/2018) [2020] ZAGPPHC 164 (10 March 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

11097/2018

Judge

NJ Kollapen

The court held that the Public Protector's determination of compensation constituted the exercise of public power and was therefore reviewable under the principle of legality, not PAJA. The applicant was entitled to rely on the principle of legality, as the factual basis for such reliance was set out in the founding affidavit. The Public Protector was not constrained by the settlement agreement to only consider the Remuneration of Key Staff report and was entitled to exercise her full powers under the law. The court found that the Public Protector had considered the relevant report and reason…

Source excerpt

• Principle Of Legality
• Public Power Review
• Settlement Agreement
• Remuneration Dispute
• Public Protector Act
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act

Democratic Alliance v Public Protector; Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution v Public Protector (11311/2018; 13394/2018)

Democratic Alliance v Public Protector; Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution v Public Protector (11311/2018; 13394/2018) [2019] ZAGPPHC 349; [2019] 4 All SA 79 (GP) (15 August 2019)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

11311/2018; 13394/2018

Judge

RG Tolmay

The High Court awarded costs against the Public Protector in both official and personal capacities, finding gross negligence in the Estina investigation.

• Personal Costs Orders
• Public Official Liability
• Punitive Costs
• Constitutional Accountability
• Public Protector Act
• Gross Negligence

National Empowerment Fund v Public Protector and Others (12349/15)

National Empowerment Fund v Public Protector and Others (12349/15) [2017] ZAGPPHC 610 (22 September 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

12349/15

Judge

Van der Westhuizen

The court found that the Public Protector's report was based on material errors of fact and law, particularly in treating multiple distinct funding applications as a single application and considering events post-complaint. The applicant processed the applications within reasonable timeframes and provided cogent reasons for refusal. The criticism regarding the timing of due diligence investigations was unfounded, as conducting such investigations upfront would be impractical and unnecessarily burdensome. The recommendations for apology and payment of 'sorry money' were ultra vires, irrational…

Source excerpt

• Maladministration
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Public Protector Act
• Due Diligence
• Remedial Action
• Costs Order