Summary Admin law Topic 3 notes

Administrative law – LAWS4063A

Topic 3: Lawfulness grounds of review



Prescribed Reading:

• Quinot (2020): Chapter 6 (145-170)
• Allpay Consolidated Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Others v Chief Executive Officer
of the South African Social Security Agency and Others (CCT 48/13) [2013] ZACC 42;
2014 (1) SA 604 (CC); 2014 (1) BCLR 1 (CC) (29 November 2013) (at paras 28-30 and
58) (99 paras)
• Chairman, State Tender Board v Digital Voice Processing (Pty) Ltd; Chairman, State
Tender Board v Sneller Digital (Pty) Ltd and Others 2012 (2) SA 16 (SCA)
• Dumani v Nair and Another 2013 (2) SA 274 (SCA)
• Fedsure Life Assurance Ltd and Others v Greater Johannesburg Transitional
Metropolitan Council and Others 1999 (1) SA 374 (CC)
• Dawood v Minister of Home Affairs (CCT35/99) [2000] ZACC 8; 2000 (3) SA 936; 2000
(8) BCLR 837 (7 June 2000), esp paras 40-56 (70 paras)
• Gauteng Gambling Board and Another v MEC for Economic Development, Gauteng
2013 (5) SA 24 (SCA)
• Judicial Service Commission and Another v Cape Bar Council and Another 2013 (1) SA
170 (SCA)
• Long Beach Homeowners Association v Department of Agriculture, Forestry and
Fisheries (South Africa) and Another (865/2016) [2017] ZASCA 122; 2018 (2) SA 42
(SCA) (22 September 2017)
• Walele v City of Cape Town (CCT 64/07) [2008] ZACC 11; 2008 (6) SA 129 (CC); 2008
(11) BCLR 1067 (CC) (13 June 2008) esp paras 54-63 (Jafta AJ) and 112-117 (O’Regan J)
(144 paras)
• Marshall NO and Others v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service
(CCT208/17) [2018] ZACC 11; 2018 (7) BCLR 830 (CC)
• MEC for Health, Eastern Cape and Another v Kirland Investments (Pty) Ltd t/a Eye and
Lazer Institute 2014 (3) SA 481 (CC)
• Minister of Trade and Industry and Others v Nieuwoudt and Another 1985 (2) SA 1 (C)
at 13
• Millennium Waste Management (Pty) Ltd v Chairperson, Tender Board: Limpopo
Province (31/2007) [2007] ZASCA 165; [2007] SCA 165 (RSA); [2008] 2 All SA 145; 2008
(2) SA 481; 2008 (5) BCLR 508; 2008 (2) SA 481 (SCA) (29 November 2007) (35 paras)
(read for technical compliance point)
• Pepcor Retirement Fund v Financial Services Board 2003 (6) SA 38 (SCA) ( 198/2002)
[2003] ZASCA 56; [2003] 3 All SA 21 (SCA) (30 May 2003) (54 paras)

Page 1 of 15

, • Security Industry Alliance v Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority and Others
2015 (1) SA 169 (SCA)
• University of Cape Town v Ministers of Education and Culture 1988 (3) SA 203 (C), esp
212F-212J
• Van Eck, NO, and Van Rensburg, NO, v Etna Stores 1947 (2) SA 984 (A)


Learning Outcomes:

• Explain the lawfulness requirement for administrative action as required by the
Constitution.
• Identify the key provisions in PAJA that deal with lawfulness.
• Explain the relevance of authority or authorisation for lawfulness of administrative
action.
• Explain what delegation of authority entails and its impact on the lawfulness of
administrative action.
• Explain the meaning of discretionary powers and how the exercise of such powers can
determine the lawfulness of administrative action.
• Apply the various grounds of lawfulness review to a given set of facts.
• Explain the important principles regarding compliance with mandatory and prescribed
conditions and procedures in taking administrative action.


6.1 Introduction

➢ Lawfulness: admin action + authorisation = aligned
➢ Lawfulness is a constraint on all exercises of public power → meaning that it applies
to both ‘administrative decisions’ (subject to PAJA) as well as ‘non-administrative
decisions’ (subject to the principle of legality)
➢ Fedsure: fundamental principle of the rule of law that exercise of PP is only legitimate
where lawful




Page 2 of 15