SANRAL distorts outcome of High Court judgment
I have noted SANRAL's media release in response to the ruling that was handed down in the Western Cape High Court yesterday.
SANRAL's statement about Judge Ashley Binns-Ward's judgment is misleading.
In contrast to what is being stated in their release, SANRAL did not achieve what they were looking for from the Western Cape High Court - an order that only a redacted version of the City of Cape Town's supplementary papers could be filed with the registrar, and thus part of the public record, whilst the full version of the supplementary papers would only be handed to the judge hearing the review matter.
Their application, if granted, would effectively have removed crucial information about the impact of the proposed tolling from the public realm and would have meant the withholding of this information from the very people directly affected.
The court dismissed their application and ordered that the ordinary, or ‘uniform', rules of court should apply. This means that the City will file its full supplementary papers with the court as any litigant would ordinarily do and that these papers will be part of the public record once the matter is called in court.