Synopsis:
Administrative action – validity of administrative decision not the
subject of counter-application or separate review application –
beneficiary of decision prejudiced – proper process must be
followed to set the decision aside – validity of decision not before
the Court
2
Administrative action – status of administrative decision
improperly taken – decision remains effectual until properly set
aside and cannot be ignored – application of Oudekraal judgment.
Application for leave to appeal concerning the validity of the approval granted by the Acting Superintendent-General, the Superintendent-General’s subsequent decision to withdraw that approval and the MEC’s decision to dismiss the respondent’s appeal against the withdrawal. The Court held that the Supreme Court of Appeal was correct in finding that the initial approval could not be set aside as it was not properly before the court in the absence of a counter-application for review brought by the state parties. This Court held that the respondent could not have been aware of the political machinations behind the approval decision and did not ask the Court to rule on its validity. The appeal was dismissed with costs.
Majority: Cameron J (Moseneke ACJ, Skweyiya ADCJ, Dambuza AJ, Froneman J, Mhlantla AJ and Nkabinde J concurring).
Separate concurrence: Froneman J.
Separate concurrence: Zondo J.
Minority: Jafta J (Madlanga J and Zondo J concurring).