Sakeliga obtains court judgment that could save business communities countrywide millions
11 March 2019
Based on “novel” and “dispositive” arguments by Sakeliga in the high court in Pretoria, local business communities are likely to save millions of rands in legal costs against Eskom. This is the implication of a watershed judgment last week in the case between Resilient Properties and others against Eskom and the eMalahleni Municipality, where Sakeliga acted as a friend of the court (amicus curiae) to prevent Eskom from cutting power to local communities.
Under the judgment Eskom (as an organ of state) is not allowed to interrupt electricity supply to a delinquent municipality (also an organ of state) until it has exhausted all remedies contained in sections 41 and 42 of the Intergovernmental Relations Framework Act, No 13 of 2005.
In her judgment Judge Hughes indicates that Sakeliga’s contributions were decisive: “Besides the constitutional and statutory provisions relied upon by Sakeliga NPC which were also advanced by the applicants and the municipalities, in my view, they advanced a novel legal point, which the other parties had not introduced, that being, the application of the Intergovernmental Relations Framework Act 13 of 2005 and the Guidelines, which I address later in this judgment. This in fact allows for a broader consideration of the facts before me and a very persuasive one at it.”
She continues: “In my view, the legal argument of the amici [Sakeliga] is dispositive to the constitutional challenge. Section 41(3) of the Constitution provides that an organ of state involved in an intergovernmental dispute must make every reasonable effort to settle the dispute by means of appropriate mechanisms and procedures provided and must exhaust all other remedies before the courts are approached to resolve the problems. The situation in this case is such an intergovernmental dispute.”