CCT25/12

[2012] ZACC 28

2013 (3) BCLR 251 (CC)

Cameron J

29 November 2012

http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/3676

Application for leave to appeal against a judgment of the SCA: Rinaldo Investments (Pty) Ltd v Giant Concerts CC and Others [2012] 3 All SA 57 (SCA). See also earlier judgment of the KwaZulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg: Giant Concerts CC v Minister of Local Government, Housing and Traditional Affairs, KwaZulu-Natal and Others 2011 (4) SA 164 (KZP)

Application for leave to appeal against a Supreme Court of Appeal judgment finding that the applicant (Giant) had failed to establish legal standing. Giant sought to set aside the sale of certain property by the Ethekwini Municipality to a film production company. Giant did not claim to act in the public interest or on behalf of a group or association or anyone who was not able to bring proceedings themselves (section 38(b)-(e) of the Constitution). Giant claimed only to act in its own interest in terms of section 38(a) of the Constitution. In a unanimous judgment, the Court affirmed that constitutional own-interest standing is broader than traditional common law standing. The own-interest litigant must however show that his or her rights or interests are directly affected by the challenged law or conduct. The interest must be real and not hypothetical or academic. Each case depends on its own facts. When a party has no standing, it is not necessary to consider the merits, unless there is indication of fraud or other gross irregularity in the conduct of a public body. The Court concluded that even on a broad approach to standing, Giant did not show that it had interests that were capable of being directly affected. This was because Giant never demonstrated that it had any serious commercial interest in the venture. In fact, Giant had failed to establish anything more than a hypothetical or academic interest. The Court found that Giant had no standing. Judgment: Cameron J (unanimous).