ADL2601
EXAM PACK
,ADL2601 2026 Final Exam Instructions and Questions
MAY-JUNE EXAM
QUESTION 1 — FMD VACCINES AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
[25 marks]
Question
The Minister of Agriculture, Piet Springbok, has rolled out the distribution of foot and
mouth disease (FMD) vaccines throughout South Africa since March 2026, in terms of
the Animal Diseases Act 35 of 1984. Farmers have welcomed the rollout because it
provides relief from the financial consequences of the outbreak.
Does the roll-out of FMD vaccines to farmers amount to administrative action in
terms of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 (PAJA)?
Model answer
The starting point is section 33 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa,
1996, which provides everyone with the right to administrative action that is lawful,
reasonable and procedurally fair. PAJA gives effect to this constitutional right.
The central issue is therefore whether the Minister's decision to roll out FMD vaccines
constitutes “administrative action” as contemplated by section 1 of PAJA.
1. Definition of administrative action
Section 1 of PAJA defines administrative action, in relevant part, as a decision taken by
an organ of state when exercising a public power or performing a public function in
terms of legislation, which adversely affects the rights of a person and has a direct,
external legal effect.
,The Constitutional Court in Chirwa v Transnet Ltd and Others identified the principal
requirements of administrative action. There must be:
1. a decision;
2. by an organ of state or other qualifying person;
3. exercising a public power or performing a public function;
4. in terms of legislation or an empowering provision;
5. which adversely affects rights;
6. which has a direct, external legal effect; and
7. which is not excluded by PAJA.
These requirements must be considered in relation to the FMD vaccine rollout.
2. Is there a decision?
The Minister has decided to roll out the distribution of FMD vaccines throughout the
Republic.
This constitutes a decision concerning the implementation of government measures to
control an animal disease. The first requirement is therefore satisfied.
3. Is the Minister an organ of state?
The Minister is exercising governmental authority as a member of the national
executive. The action is therefore being undertaken by an organ of state.
This requirement is accordingly satisfied.
4. Is a public power or public function being exercised?
The vaccine rollout concerns the protection of South Africa's livestock and the
prevention and control of an animal disease.
The Minister is exercising statutory governmental authority rather than a private or
commercial power. The power is therefore public in nature.
, The fact that the decision is made by a Minister does not automatically make it
administrative action, however. The courts have repeatedly emphasised that the nature
of the function, rather than simply the identity of the functionary, is decisive.
In President of the Republic of South Africa v South African Rugby Football Union
(SARFU), the Constitutional Court held that the relevant question is whether the
function performed is administrative. Similarly, Grey's Marine Hout Bay (Pty) Ltd v
Minister of Public Works emphasised that administrative action generally involves the
bureaucracy carrying out the daily functions of the State, particularly the implementation
of legislation and policy with direct consequences for people.
5. Is the power exercised in terms of legislation?
The facts specifically state that the vaccine rollout is undertaken in terms of the
Animal Diseases Act 35 of 1984.
This is important because PAJA expressly contemplates the exercise of public power or
performance of a public function in terms of legislation.
The Minister is therefore not merely making a political statement or formulating a broad
governmental policy. He is implementing statutory authority relating to the control of
animal disease.
6. Administrative action versus policy formulation
A distinction must be made between formulating policy and implementing
legislation.
Policy formulation by members of the executive will generally not constitute
administrative action. By contrast, the implementation of legislation through
administrative decisions generally will.
In Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association of South Africa: In re Ex Parte
President of the Republic of South Africa, the Constitutional Court explained that the
EXAM PACK
,ADL2601 2026 Final Exam Instructions and Questions
MAY-JUNE EXAM
QUESTION 1 — FMD VACCINES AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
[25 marks]
Question
The Minister of Agriculture, Piet Springbok, has rolled out the distribution of foot and
mouth disease (FMD) vaccines throughout South Africa since March 2026, in terms of
the Animal Diseases Act 35 of 1984. Farmers have welcomed the rollout because it
provides relief from the financial consequences of the outbreak.
Does the roll-out of FMD vaccines to farmers amount to administrative action in
terms of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 (PAJA)?
Model answer
The starting point is section 33 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa,
1996, which provides everyone with the right to administrative action that is lawful,
reasonable and procedurally fair. PAJA gives effect to this constitutional right.
The central issue is therefore whether the Minister's decision to roll out FMD vaccines
constitutes “administrative action” as contemplated by section 1 of PAJA.
1. Definition of administrative action
Section 1 of PAJA defines administrative action, in relevant part, as a decision taken by
an organ of state when exercising a public power or performing a public function in
terms of legislation, which adversely affects the rights of a person and has a direct,
external legal effect.
,The Constitutional Court in Chirwa v Transnet Ltd and Others identified the principal
requirements of administrative action. There must be:
1. a decision;
2. by an organ of state or other qualifying person;
3. exercising a public power or performing a public function;
4. in terms of legislation or an empowering provision;
5. which adversely affects rights;
6. which has a direct, external legal effect; and
7. which is not excluded by PAJA.
These requirements must be considered in relation to the FMD vaccine rollout.
2. Is there a decision?
The Minister has decided to roll out the distribution of FMD vaccines throughout the
Republic.
This constitutes a decision concerning the implementation of government measures to
control an animal disease. The first requirement is therefore satisfied.
3. Is the Minister an organ of state?
The Minister is exercising governmental authority as a member of the national
executive. The action is therefore being undertaken by an organ of state.
This requirement is accordingly satisfied.
4. Is a public power or public function being exercised?
The vaccine rollout concerns the protection of South Africa's livestock and the
prevention and control of an animal disease.
The Minister is exercising statutory governmental authority rather than a private or
commercial power. The power is therefore public in nature.
, The fact that the decision is made by a Minister does not automatically make it
administrative action, however. The courts have repeatedly emphasised that the nature
of the function, rather than simply the identity of the functionary, is decisive.
In President of the Republic of South Africa v South African Rugby Football Union
(SARFU), the Constitutional Court held that the relevant question is whether the
function performed is administrative. Similarly, Grey's Marine Hout Bay (Pty) Ltd v
Minister of Public Works emphasised that administrative action generally involves the
bureaucracy carrying out the daily functions of the State, particularly the implementation
of legislation and policy with direct consequences for people.
5. Is the power exercised in terms of legislation?
The facts specifically state that the vaccine rollout is undertaken in terms of the
Animal Diseases Act 35 of 1984.
This is important because PAJA expressly contemplates the exercise of public power or
performance of a public function in terms of legislation.
The Minister is therefore not merely making a political statement or formulating a broad
governmental policy. He is implementing statutory authority relating to the control of
animal disease.
6. Administrative action versus policy formulation
A distinction must be made between formulating policy and implementing
legislation.
Policy formulation by members of the executive will generally not constitute
administrative action. By contrast, the implementation of legislation through
administrative decisions generally will.
In Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association of South Africa: In re Ex Parte
President of the Republic of South Africa, the Constitutional Court explained that the
