South Africa Case Law

Ingerop South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Water and Sanitation and Others (11175/2024)

Ingerop South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Water and Sanitation and Others (11175/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 336 (6 August 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

11175/2024

Judges

Lekhukeni, Sipunzi

High Court held it lacked PAJA jurisdiction over a tender review and, in any event, the application was filed out of time without adequate condonation.

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Jurisdiction Of High Courts
• Condonation For Late Review
• Tender Review
• Delay In Instituting Proceedings
• Administrative-law

Ngaraga Properties (Pty) Ltd v MEC for Education, Limpopo Province and Others (11183/2024)

Ngaraga Properties (Pty) Ltd v MEC for Education, Limpopo Province and Others (11183/2024) [2025] ZALMPPHC 138 (23 July 2025)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

11183/2024

Judge

Mashifane

The High Court granted an interim interdict halting performance of a sanitary pads tender contract pending review, finding a prima facie procurement challenge and favourable balance of convenience.

• Interim Interdict
• Tender Review
• Preferential Procurement Policy
• Collusion In Tendering
• Section 217 Constitution
• Bid Evaluation

MEC for Health: Gauteng Province and Others v Buhle Waste (Pty) Ltd (338/2024 ; 384/2024)

MEC for Health: Gauteng Province and Others v Buhle Waste (Pty) Ltd (338/2024 ; 384/2024) [2025] ZASCA 102 (15 July 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

338/2024 & 384/2024

Judges

Mbatha JA, Baartman JA, Steyn AJJA, Tolmay AJJA, Vally AJJA

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the high court erred by setting aside administrative action through a declarator rather than a review under PAJA. The respondent, Buhle Waste, avoided the prescribed review procedure and timeframes, prejudicing the other parties and compromising the public interest in finality of administrative action. The high court granted relief not properly pleaded or canvassed, depriving the appellants of the opportunity to respond with the benefit of the Rule 53 record. The correct procedure for challenging administrative action is a review under PAJA, and declarato…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Tender Review
• Declaratory Relief
• Interdictory Relief
• Pleading Requirements

Aptitude Trading Enterprise (Pty) Ltd v The City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Another (251/2024)

Aptitude Trading Enterprise (Pty) Ltd v The City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Another (251/2024) [2025] ZASCA 72 (30 May 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

251/2024

Judges

Mocumie, Mokgohloa, Coppin, Tolmay, Molitsoane

The Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal as moot after a tender suspension order had lapsed. It held there was no live issue warranting merits judgment.

• Mootness
• Suspension Of Invalidity Order
• Tender Review
• Superior Courts Act Section 16
• Public Importance Exception
• Tender-review

Thandisile Business Services (Pty) Ltd v Department of Home Affairs and Others (2025-035879)

Thandisile Business Services (Pty) Ltd v Department of Home Affairs and Others (2025-035879) [2025] ZAGPPHC 397 (16 April 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2025-035879

Judge

MPN Mbongwe

The High Court struck an urgent tender-review application from the roll, finding the urgency was self-created because the applicant delayed acting.

• Urgency In Applications
• Tender Review
• Self Created Urgency
• Urgency-in-applications
• Tender-review
• Self-created-urgency

Smada Security Services (Pty) Ltd v Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (081565/2023)

Smada Security Services (Pty) Ltd v Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (081565/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 311 (26 March 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

081565/2023

Judge

Holland-Muter

The High Court granted leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal, finding reasonable prospects of success and compelling circumstances in a tender dispute.

• Leave To Appeal
• Reasonable Prospect Of Success
• Compelling Circumstances
• Tender Review
• Leave-to-appeal
• Reasonable-prospect-of-success

Conpack Building & Civils (Pty) Ltd V University of the Western Cape and Another (014117/25)

Conpack Building & Civils (Pty) Ltd V University of the Western Cape and Another (014117/25) [2025] ZAWCHC 90 (7 March 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

014117/25

Judge

DM Thulare

The court refused an interim interdict stopping a university refurbishment pending review, holding that the tender was already implemented and the applicant had not shown a prima facie right or irreparable harm.

• Interim Interdict
• Tender Review
• Prima Facie Right
• Balance Of Convenience
• Alternative Remedy
• Interim-interdict

APM Terminals BV v Transnet SOC Limited and Others (Leave to Appeal) (D3052/2024)

APM Terminals BV v Transnet SOC Limited and Others (Leave to Appeal) (D3052/2024) [2024] ZAKZDHC 90 (11 December 2024)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

D3052/2024

Judge

Mossop

Leave to appeal was refused against an interim interdict halting a Transnet tender award, with the court holding the order was not appealable.

• Interim Interdict
• Leave To Appeal
• Tender Review
• Solvency Ratio Requirement
• Superior Courts Act
• Administrative Action

OS Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Rustenburg Local Municipality and Others (927/24)

OS Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Rustenburg Local Municipality and Others (927/24) [2024] ZANWHC 303 (2 December 2024)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

927/24

Judge

WESSELS AJ

The High Court dismissed an urgent interdict application over a municipal tender because the second tender had already been concluded, making the relief academic.

• Interim Interdict
• Tender Review
• Mscoa Compliance
• Urgency
• Costs Award
• Interim-interdict

Roadmac Surfacing (Pty) Ltd v MEC for the Department of Police, Roads and Transport, Free State Province and Another (461/2023)

Roadmac Surfacing (Pty) Ltd v MEC for the Department of Police, Roads and Transport, Free State Province and Another (461/2023) [2024] ZASCA 157 (14 November 2024)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

461/2023

Judges

Hughes, Mabindla-Boqwana, Molefe, Keightley, Mjali

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appeal on the merits was moot, as the works had been completed and no practical effect would result from further relief regarding the tender award. However, the High Court's failure to determine the reserved costs from the interim interdict proceedings constituted an exceptional circumstance under s 16(2) of the Superior Courts Act. The appellate court found that justice required resolution of the outstanding costs issue, as the matter had not reached finality. The first respondent was liable for the wasted costs occasioned by the postponement of the…

Source excerpt

• Practical Effect Of Appeal
• Reserved Costs
• Exceptional Circumstances
• Tender Review
• Interim Interdict