, ADL2601
ASSIGNMENT 1 SEMESTER 2
2026
DUE 25 AUGUST 2026
1. "Any decision taken... by an organ of state"
The first requirement is that the action must be a "decision" taken by an "organ of state".
Legal meaning and significance:
"Decision": Section 1 of PAJA defines a decision broadly to include "any decision of an
administrative nature" taken under an empowering provision. This expressly includes "making,
suspending, revoking or refusing to make an order, award or determination" and "issuing,
suspending, revoking or refusing to issue a licence, authority or other instrument" (PAJA, 2000:
s 1).
"Organ of state": Section 239 of the Constitution defines an organ of state to include any
department of state or administration in the national, provincial, or local sphere of government
(Constitution, 1996: s 239). The Constitutional Court has emphasised that the focus is not on
the specific functionary but on the function being performed (Hoexter, 2012: 145).
Application:
The Provincial Department of Transport is a provincial government department and therefore
clearly an "organ of state" as defined. The revocation of Mr X's permit through a formal letter is a
classic example of a "decision" which "suspends" or "revokes" an "authority or other instrument"
(PAJA, 2000: s 1). This satisfies the first requirement.
2. "...when exercising a public power or performing a public function in terms of any legislation"
The decision must be made in the exercise of a public power or performance of a public function
derived from legislation.
Legal meaning and significance:
A decision by an organ of state only qualifies as administrative action if it is sourced in legislation or
the Constitution (Hoexter, 2012: 148). The crucial test is whether the power is a statutory one
exercised within the framework of the law, as opposed to a private or contractual power
(Corruption Watch v President, 2018: para 38). The courts distinguish between policy formulation
(which is often not administrative) and policy implementation (which is) (Hoexter, 2012: 150).
Furthermore, when the state acts, it does not have the same free hand as a private individual
(President v SARFU, 2000: para 141).
ASSIGNMENT 1 SEMESTER 2
2026
DUE 25 AUGUST 2026
1. "Any decision taken... by an organ of state"
The first requirement is that the action must be a "decision" taken by an "organ of state".
Legal meaning and significance:
"Decision": Section 1 of PAJA defines a decision broadly to include "any decision of an
administrative nature" taken under an empowering provision. This expressly includes "making,
suspending, revoking or refusing to make an order, award or determination" and "issuing,
suspending, revoking or refusing to issue a licence, authority or other instrument" (PAJA, 2000:
s 1).
"Organ of state": Section 239 of the Constitution defines an organ of state to include any
department of state or administration in the national, provincial, or local sphere of government
(Constitution, 1996: s 239). The Constitutional Court has emphasised that the focus is not on
the specific functionary but on the function being performed (Hoexter, 2012: 145).
Application:
The Provincial Department of Transport is a provincial government department and therefore
clearly an "organ of state" as defined. The revocation of Mr X's permit through a formal letter is a
classic example of a "decision" which "suspends" or "revokes" an "authority or other instrument"
(PAJA, 2000: s 1). This satisfies the first requirement.
2. "...when exercising a public power or performing a public function in terms of any legislation"
The decision must be made in the exercise of a public power or performance of a public function
derived from legislation.
Legal meaning and significance:
A decision by an organ of state only qualifies as administrative action if it is sourced in legislation or
the Constitution (Hoexter, 2012: 148). The crucial test is whether the power is a statutory one
exercised within the framework of the law, as opposed to a private or contractual power
(Corruption Watch v President, 2018: para 38). The courts distinguish between policy formulation
(which is often not administrative) and policy implementation (which is) (Hoexter, 2012: 150).
Furthermore, when the state acts, it does not have the same free hand as a private individual
(President v SARFU, 2000: para 141).
