The award or non-award of government tenders : what is my remedy in law?

Abstract

This dissertation is a comprehensive examination of the nature and scope of the different remedies that litigants may seek in matters concerning the awards of government tenders. Government procurement is a very important aspect in any democratic society, and the ambit of government procurement has expanded vastly in the last couple of years. This is evident from the substantial increase in cases concerning government procurement and the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000. Government procurement has constitutional status, as the procurement of goods and services are governed by section 217 of the Constitution, which section specifically stipulates the manner in which the state must contract for goods and services. Not only are the state bound by the manner in which they must act when procuring for goods and services, but the courts are also faced with the difficulty in granting orders that comply with the provisions of the Constitution. In terms of section 38 of the Constitution the courts must grant appropriate relief, which is not a simple task, especially in the framework of matters relating to government tenders. The qualification of the orders that the courts must grant go even further than this in that orders must also comply with the provisions of PAJA, and be just and equitable. The court’s interpretation of what would constitute appropriate relief and what would suffice as a just and equitable order in matters related to the awards of government tenders are critically analyzed and dicussed, by examining various cases in this specific field. Each chapter focuses on the various remedies that are at an aggrieved tenderer’s disposal, either under the provisions of the Constitution or those listed in section 8 of PAJA. Due to the importance of government procurement in South Africa, the development of the legal aspects thereof is equally as important. Copyright