Afrirent (Pty) Ltd and Another v NNSI Group (Pty) Ltd and Others (018542/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1211 (19 November 2024)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
018542/2022
Judge
Ally
The High Court ordered the review applicant to serve and file its Rule 53(3) notice within 10 days and made the costs of the interlocutory application costs in the cause.
Mathatha General Trading CC and Others v Head of the Department of Safety, Security and Liason Mpumalanga Province and Others (2350/2022) [2023] ZAMPMBHC 37 (14 July 2023)
Court
Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga
Case number
2350/2022
Judge
KGOELE
The High Court rescinded an interim tender order after finding it was granted before the review was ripe and without proper opposition on the merits.
Mokhele v Minister of Defence and Others (4228/2021) [2022] ZAFSHC 104 (27 May 2022)
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
4228/2021
Judge
Daniso
The court dismissed an application to compel production of a fuller Rule 53 record, holding the filed documents were sufficient for review of the military appeal.
Dibakoane v Head of Department: Department of Culture, Sports and Recreation (Mpumalanga Province) (3309/2020) [2021] ZAMPMBHC 63 (5 October 2021)
Court
Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga
Case number
3309/2020
Judge
Greyling-Coetzer AJ
The court found that the respondents failed to comply with Rule 53 by not dispatching the record required for review proceedings. The jurisdictional challenge raised by the respondents must be determined on the applicant's pleadings, which may be informed by the record. Since the applicant's founding affidavit was not before the court, it could not be established that the record would not inform the pleadings. Therefore, the respondents are obliged to dispatch the record before the issue of jurisdiction can be determined. The applicant's notice was broader than ordinarily permitted, but only…
Sithole and Others v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another (6146/2017) [2018] ZAFSHC 34 (29 March 2018)
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
6146/2017
Judges
Rampai, Mathebula
The High Court dismissed an interlocutory application to compel production of a review record, finding the respondents had substantially complied with Rule 53.
Democratic Alliance v President of the Republic of S A; In re: Democratic Alliance v President of the Republic of S A and Others (9 May 2017) (24396/2017) [2017] ZAGPPHC 148; [2017] 3 All SA 124 (GP); 2017 (4) SA 253 (GP) (9 May 2017)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
24396/2017
Judge
Vally
The court held that Rule 53 applies mutatis mutandis to review applications challenging executive decisions, including those of the President in dismissing and appointing Ministers and Deputy Ministers. The purpose of Rule 53 is to facilitate access to the record and reasons for the decision under review, enabling both the applicant and the court to properly assess the lawfulness and rationality of the decision. The President's argument for a literal interpretation of Rule 53(1) was rejected in favour of a purposive approach, given constitutional developments making executive decisions review…
South African National Roads Agency Limited v City of Cape Town and Others; In Re: Protea Parkway Consortium v City of Cape Town and Others (6165/2012) [2014] ZAWCHC 125; [2014] 4 All SA 497 (WCC) (28 August 2014)
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
6165/2012
Judge
A.G. Binns-Ward
The court held that the implied undertaking rule forms part of South African law and applies to documents disclosed under compulsion in terms of rule 53(1)(b), including the administrative record in judicial review proceedings. This rule restricts dissemination, publication, or distribution of such documents and information to the litigation for which they were disclosed, unless released by the court or the disclosing party. The principle of open justice does not override the implied undertaking rule prior to the hearing, and rule 62(7) further limits access to the court file to parties and t…
University of North-West Staff Association and Others v Campus Rector of the University North-West and Others (471/2007) [2007] ZANWHC 51 (27 September 2007)
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Case number
471/2007
Judge
M.T.R. Mogoeng
The court held that Rule 53(5)(b) time runs from expiry of the Rule 53(4) amendment period, making the respondents’ answering affidavit late and irregular.
