South Africa Case Law

Ndodana Consulting Engineers (Pty) Ltd and Others v South African National Roads Agency SOC Limited and Others (B3733/23)

Ndodana Consulting Engineers (Pty) Ltd and Others v South African National Roads Agency SOC Limited and Others (B3733/23) [2025] ZAGPPHC 448 (2 May 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

B3733/23

Judge

E van der Schyff

The High Court allocated costs in several interlocutory applications arising from a review, awarding Ndodana costs against SANRAL and Ingerop in some matters and ordering no costs in another.

• Costs Awards
• Party And Party Costs
• Employment Of Senior Counsel
• Confidentiality Regime
• Rule 53 Record
• Urgent Application

Blue Chip Flight School (Pty) Ltd and Others v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality (2022/26839)

Blue Chip Flight School (Pty) Ltd and Others v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality (2022/26839) [2025] ZAGPPHC 32; [2025] 2 All SA 91 (GP) (20 January 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2022/26839

Judge

LE Grange

The High Court dismissed a Rule 30A/53 application to compel further source documents, finding the requested material was not part of the record considered in adopting the MTREF.

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Delay Rule
• Rule 53 Record
• Jurisdiction
• Legality Review
• Administrative-law

Mabotwane Security Services and Others v City Of Ekhurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality and Others (2023/071950)

Mabotwane Security Services and Others v City Of Ekhurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality and Others (2023/071950) [2024] ZAGPJHC 488 (14 May 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023/071950

Judge

H A van der Merwe

The court held that applicants were entitled to the tender-review record under Rule 53(1)(b), and unsupported confidentiality claims did not justify restricting access.

• Rule 53 Record
• Confidentiality In Tender Documents
• Review Of Tender Award
• Rule-53-record
• Tender-review
• Confidentiality

Energi Licences (Pty) Ltd v Controller of Petroleum Products and Others (2023-128106)

Energi Licences (Pty) Ltd v Controller of Petroleum Products and Others (2023-128106) [2024] ZAGPPHC 301 (27 March 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2023-128106

Judge

SJ Cowen

The High Court struck an urgent interim interdict application from the roll for self-created urgency, but ordered production of the overdue Rule 53 record.

• Interim Interdict
• Petroleum Licensing
• Regulation 24 Compliance
• Self Created Urgency
• Rule 53 Record
• Urgent-interdict

Raubex Construction (Pty) Ltd v Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (Soc) and Another (117558-2023)

Raubex Construction (Pty) Ltd v Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (Soc) and Another (117558-2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 194 (27 February 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

117558/2023

Judge

M A Makume

The High Court struck an application off the urgent roll for lack of urgency, finding the applicant failed to properly plead urgency under Rule 6(12)(b).

• Rule 53 Record
• Urgency In Motion Proceedings
• Condonation Of Non Compliance
• Review Of Tender Award
• Urgency-in-motion-proceedings
• Rule-53-record

Kommal v Health Professions Council of South Africa (60785/2020)

Kommal v Health Professions Council of South Africa (60785/2020) [2024] ZAGPPHC 175 (26 February 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

60785/2020

Judge

Mbongwe

The court found that the respondent's decision to bring charges of professional misconduct against the applicant was not final and did not constitute an administrative action reviewable under PAJA. The disciplinary process had not yet been completed, and the decision was merely a facilitation of the process, not a determination of rights. The applicant failed to explain the delay in filing a replying affidavit and did not seek condonation for the late filing, which is required under PAJA. The court held that all necessary documentation for the disciplinary proceedings had been provided and th…

Source excerpt

• Review Of Administrative Action
• Disciplinary Proceedings
• Powers Of Attorney
• Condonation
• Rule 53 Record
• Costs Order

Manaka v University of the Witwatersrand (021837/2023)

Manaka v University of the Witwatersrand (021837/2023) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1186 (18 October 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

021837/2023

Judge

JW Scholtz

The court held that the applicant is entitled under Rule 53 to transcripts of the proceedings and the names of panel members involved in the decisions to exclude him from the MBBCh III programme, provided such transcripts exist. The court found no convincing reason to exclude these items from the record, as they are directly relevant to the administrative decision under review. However, the court determined that the statistics and other information sought by the applicant do not form part of the record, as there is no evidence they were before the decision-makers or considered in the impugned…

Source excerpt

• Rule 53 Record
• Academic Exclusion
• Discovery Of Documents
• Mootness
• Redaction Of Personal Information

SMEC South Africa (Pty) Ltd v MEC for Economic Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs, KwaZulu-Natal Province and Another (7572/2022P)

SMEC South Africa (Pty) Ltd v MEC for Economic Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs, KwaZulu-Natal Province and Another (7572/2022P) [2023] ZAKZPHC 113 (29 September 2023)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

7572/2022P

Judge

Nicholson AJ

The applicant, as an own-interest litigant, is only entitled to documents relevant to the narrow issue of the review, specifically those relating to the pricing for negotiations that led to its exclusion from the tender process. The court found that the applicant's standing does not extend to obtaining competitors' bids, which contain confidential information and implicate the interests of third parties who were not joined. The failure to join the unsuccessful bidders constitutes material non-joinder, and the court upheld this objection. Accordingly, the applicant cannot be provided with the…

Source excerpt

• Rule 53 Record
• Review Of Tender Award
• Locus Standi
• Material Non Joinder
• Confidentiality Of Bid Documents

Altron TMT (Pty) Ltd v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Others (23/075060)

Altron TMT (Pty) Ltd v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Others (23/075060) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1161 (8 September 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

23/075060

Judge

I de Vos

The High Court set aside a successful tenderer’s confidentiality claims and ordered disclosure of Rule 53 record documents in a municipal tender review.

• Tender Review
• Confidentiality Of Documents
• Rule 53 Record
• Constitutional Rights
• Costs Punitive Scale
• Public Interest

Board of Healthcare Funders NPC v Council for Medical Schemes and Others (2022-012058)

Board of Healthcare Funders NPC v Council for Medical Schemes and Others (2022-012058) [2023] ZAGPPHC 661 (10 August 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2022-012058

Judge

E van der Schyff

The High Court struck an urgent contempt and section 18(3) application from the roll, finding the matter was not so extremely urgent as to justify truncated time periods.

• Rule 53 Record
• Contempt Of Court
• Section 18 Application
• Urgency
• Punitive Costs
• Contempt-of-court