RRLLB81
Assignment 2 Semester 2 2025
Research Report
THE Doctrine of Functus Officio and Defective
Administrative Actions in Administrative Law
Due Date: September 2025
THE Doctrine of Functus Officio and Defective Administrative Actions in
Administrative Law
By
[RRLLB81 STUDENT]
(012345678)
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
BACHELOR OF LAWS
Terms of use
in the By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document as a guide for learning, comparison and reference purpose,
Terms of use
Not to duplicate, reproduce and/or misrepresent the contents of this document as your own work,
By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document
Fully accept the consequences
solely as a guide forshould you plagiarise
learning, reference,or and
misuse this document.
comparison purposes,
Ensure originality of your own work, and fully accept the consequences should you plagiarise or misuse this document.
Comply with all relevant standards, guidelines, regulations, and legislation governing academic and written work.
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is" without any express or
implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or liability for any actions taken based on the
information contained within this document. This document is intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes.
Reproduction, resale, or transmission of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
, +27 67 171 1739
THE Doctrine of Functus Officio and Defective Administrative Actions in
Administrative Law
By
[RRLLB81 STUDENT]
(012345678)
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
BACHELOR OF LAWS
in the
DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL AND PROCEDURAL LAW
SCHOOL OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA
SUPERVISOR: PROF MM MONYAKANE
RRLLB81 ASSESSMENT 2 / FINAL PORTFOLIO
(DUE DATE: September 2025)
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is"
without any express or implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or
liability for any actions taken based on the information contained within this document. This document is
intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes. Reproduction, resale, or transmission
of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
, +27 67 171 1739
ABSTRACT
This research investigates the doctrine of functus officio and its implications for
defective administrative actions in South African administrative law. The principle
dictates that once a decision is made, the decision-maker‘s authority is exhausted,
thereby ensuring finality, legality, and certainty. However, complications arise when
the administrative action is invalid, unfair, or void from the outset. Such defects
undermine certainty because beneficiaries and officials alike are placed in uncertain
legal positions. Through an analysis of case law, including AllPay Consolidated
Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Chief Executive Officer, South African Social
Security Agency (No 2) and Oudekraal Estates (Pty) Ltd v City of Cape Town, as
well as statutory frameworks such as the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of
2000, this study critically examines how South African courts balance the tension
between finality and legality. The findings highlight the need for a flexible application
of functus officio that accommodates fairness, legality, and the rule of law.
KEYWORDS
Functus Officio
Defective Administrative Action
Administrative Law
Legality
Certainty
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is"
without any express or implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or
liability for any actions taken based on the information contained within this document. This document is
intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes. Reproduction, resale, or transmission
of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
Assignment 2 Semester 2 2025
Research Report
THE Doctrine of Functus Officio and Defective
Administrative Actions in Administrative Law
Due Date: September 2025
THE Doctrine of Functus Officio and Defective Administrative Actions in
Administrative Law
By
[RRLLB81 STUDENT]
(012345678)
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
BACHELOR OF LAWS
Terms of use
in the By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document as a guide for learning, comparison and reference purpose,
Terms of use
Not to duplicate, reproduce and/or misrepresent the contents of this document as your own work,
By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document
Fully accept the consequences
solely as a guide forshould you plagiarise
learning, reference,or and
misuse this document.
comparison purposes,
Ensure originality of your own work, and fully accept the consequences should you plagiarise or misuse this document.
Comply with all relevant standards, guidelines, regulations, and legislation governing academic and written work.
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is" without any express or
implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or liability for any actions taken based on the
information contained within this document. This document is intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes.
Reproduction, resale, or transmission of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
, +27 67 171 1739
THE Doctrine of Functus Officio and Defective Administrative Actions in
Administrative Law
By
[RRLLB81 STUDENT]
(012345678)
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
BACHELOR OF LAWS
in the
DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL AND PROCEDURAL LAW
SCHOOL OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA
SUPERVISOR: PROF MM MONYAKANE
RRLLB81 ASSESSMENT 2 / FINAL PORTFOLIO
(DUE DATE: September 2025)
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is"
without any express or implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or
liability for any actions taken based on the information contained within this document. This document is
intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes. Reproduction, resale, or transmission
of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
, +27 67 171 1739
ABSTRACT
This research investigates the doctrine of functus officio and its implications for
defective administrative actions in South African administrative law. The principle
dictates that once a decision is made, the decision-maker‘s authority is exhausted,
thereby ensuring finality, legality, and certainty. However, complications arise when
the administrative action is invalid, unfair, or void from the outset. Such defects
undermine certainty because beneficiaries and officials alike are placed in uncertain
legal positions. Through an analysis of case law, including AllPay Consolidated
Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Chief Executive Officer, South African Social
Security Agency (No 2) and Oudekraal Estates (Pty) Ltd v City of Cape Town, as
well as statutory frameworks such as the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of
2000, this study critically examines how South African courts balance the tension
between finality and legality. The findings highlight the need for a flexible application
of functus officio that accommodates fairness, legality, and the rule of law.
KEYWORDS
Functus Officio
Defective Administrative Action
Administrative Law
Legality
Certainty
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is"
without any express or implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or
liability for any actions taken based on the information contained within this document. This document is
intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes. Reproduction, resale, or transmission
of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
