South Africa Case Law

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services In Re Vendcorp 54 CC v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services and Another (Leave to Appeal) (14711/2023)

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services In Re Vendcorp 54 CC v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services and Another (Leave to Appeal) (14711/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 343 (25 March 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

14711/2023

Judge

Ngalwana

The High Court granted leave to appeal on five tax-administration questions about CSARS investigations, authorisation, VDP notice, and substitution.

• Tax Administration Act
• Administrative Action Review
• Voluntary Disclosure Programme
• Notice Requirements
• Authorisation Of Investigations
• Substitution Order

Overrox Trading 70 CC and Another v Controller of Petroleum Products and Others (AR 293/22)

Overrox Trading 70 CC and Another v Controller of Petroleum Products and Others (AR 293/22) [2025] ZAKZPHC 1 (7 January 2025)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

AR 293/22

Judges

Nkosi, Olsen, Moodley

The court found that the appellants failed to provide an acceptable explanation for their delay in delivering the answering affidavit, and the court a quo exercised its discretion judicially in refusing the adjournment. The appeal against the refusal of the adjournment was dismissed. Regarding the substitution order, the court held that exceptional circumstances justifying such an order were neither pleaded nor established. The substitution order was issued mero motu by the court a quo without affording the parties an opportunity to address the existence of exceptional circumstances. This inf…

Source excerpt

• Review Of Administrative Action
• Substitution Order
• Adjournment Application
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act

Kuzobalula v Ingquza Local Municipality and Another (4797/2023)

Kuzobalula v Ingquza Local Municipality and Another (4797/2023) [2024] ZAECMHC 16 (28 March 2024)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

4797/2023

Judge

Majiki

The court found that the municipality's decision to withdraw the tender was not rationally connected to the reasons advanced, as the five-year financial statement requirement was not prohibited by current regulations and the municipality relied on repealed provisions. The municipality failed to provide objective criteria for not awarding the tender to the applicant, who was the preferred bidder and had scored the highest points. The process was procedurally unfair, as bidders were not afforded an opportunity to be heard prior to withdrawal, and the municipality was not transparent about its d…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act
• Municipal Supply Chain Management
• Tender Award Review
• Substitution Order
• Procedural Fairness

Kufanikiwa Consulting (Pty) Ltd and Others v Member of the Executive Council for the Department of Transport, KwaZulu-Natal Province and Another (15659/2023P)

Kufanikiwa Consulting (Pty) Ltd and Others v Member of the Executive Council for the Department of Transport, KwaZulu-Natal Province and Another (15659/2023P) [2024] ZAKZPHC 24 (22 March 2024)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

15659/2023P

Judge

Pitman AJ

The High Court held that cancelling a late-stage tender was administrative action reviewable under PAJA and, applying stare decisis, ordered the Department to implement the bid awards.

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Tender Cancellation
• Stare Decisis
• Preferential Procurement Regulations
• Substitution Order
• Administrative-law

Harding v Minister of Home Affairs and Others (14733/2023)

Harding v Minister of Home Affairs and Others (14733/2023) [2023] ZAWCHC 267 (30 October 2023)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

14733/2023

Judge

Baartman

The court found that the applicant had met the financial requirements for permanent residence under section 27(e) of the Immigration Act, both at the time of his initial application and subsequently, as evidenced by his property ownership, rental income, and irrevocable pension exceeding the prescribed minimum. The Department of Home Affairs failed to provide adequate reasons for its inability to verify the applicant's pension and assets, did not clarify the verification process, and ignored requests for explanation. The respondents conceded that the decision should be reviewed and set aside…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Immigration Permits
• Substitution Order
• Retirement Residence
• Just Administrative Action

Thato Kholofelo Matsaung N.O and Another v Premier of Limpopo Province and Others (7879/2019)

Thato Kholofelo Matsaung N.O and Another v Premier of Limpopo Province and Others (7879/2019) [2023] ZALMPPHC 70 (11 August 2023)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

7879/2019

Judge

M V Semenya

The court found that the Premier's failure to comply with the prior order and statutory obligations under the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act and PAJA constituted unlawful administrative inaction. The applicants demonstrated direct and substantial interest, establishing locus standi. Exceptional circumstances existed, including prolonged delay, disregard for the rule of law, and continued prejudice to the applicants and community. The court held that remitting the matter to the Premier would result in further delay and that a substitution order recognising the first applic…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Traditional Leadership Recognition
• Judicial Review Of Administrative Inaction
• Locus Standi
• Substitution Order

Lepheana v Premier of the Eastern Cape Province and Others (4902/2021)

Lepheana v Premier of the Eastern Cape Province and Others (4902/2021) [2022] ZAECMHC 50 (13 December 2022)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

4902/2021

Judge

Notyesi

The court dismissed an application to compel the Premier to appoint an investigation team for a traditional leadership claim, finding the earlier order bound the Commission, not the respondents.

• Review Of Administrative Action
• Substitution Order
• Traditional Leadership Claims
• Statutory Interpretation
• Enforcement Of Court Orders
• Traditional-leadership

Sibanda v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others (34933/2016)

Sibanda v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others (34933/2016) [2022] ZAGPPHC 829 (28 October 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

34933/2016

Judge

C M Rip

High Court review of a Road Accident Fund appeal tribunal decision was granted after the court found relevant expert evidence was ignored and substituted the outcome.

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Review Of Tribunal Decision
• Serious Injury Assessment
• Road Accident Fund Act
• Substitution Order
• Administrative-law

Ling and Another v The Director-General of the Department of Home Affairs and Another (6928/2022)

Ling and Another v The Director-General of the Department of Home Affairs and Another (6928/2022) [2022] ZAWCHC 177 (9 September 2022)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

6928/2022

Judge

J Cloete

The court found that the Director-General's refusal of the applicants' permanent residence applications was based solely on a material mistake of fact regarding the authenticity of a bank statement, which was later confirmed to be legitimate. The Director-General failed to provide adequate reasons, leaving the applicants unable to address the alleged fraud or pursue internal remedies. The respondents conceded that the decision was susceptible to review but opposed a substitution order. The court held that, given the lack of any other grounds for refusal, the absence of relevant expertise requ…

Source excerpt

• Judicial Review Under Paja
• Adequacy Of Reasons
• Substitution Order
• Immigration Permits
• Material Mistake Of Fact

San Ridge Rental Property (PTY) LTD v The Municipal Manager: City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality (11550/20)

San Ridge Rental Property (PTY) LTD v The Municipal Manager: City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality (11550/20) [2022] ZAGPJHC 339 (18 May 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

11550/20

Judge

Réan Strydom

The court found that the applicant's dwellings were excluded from the 'multiple dwelling' category under the tariff policy due to the specific exclusion for 'block of flats', which, interpreted in light of the Interpretation Act, includes the plural. The respondents failed to provide evidence or reasons for the classification decision, and the review was properly directed at the administrative act rather than legislative authority. The court held that, although only two relevant categories were defined ('multi-dwelling' and 'flat'), the exclusion for 'block of flats' applied to the applicant'…

Source excerpt

• Tariff Policy Interpretation
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Municipal Services Charges
• Substitution Order
• Interpretation Act
• Costs Order