In September 2025, the High Court handed down a judgment in favour of a trust that sought to purchase land from a municipality, ruling that the trust was entitled to procedural fairness in terms of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA).      

The matter arose from an application by the trust to purchase 4 800 m² of municipal property in Mossel Bay to create and maintain a public access point to the beach with amenities and changing rooms. The municipality gave in-principle approval subject to a public participation process (PPP). Several objections were raised during the PPP. The municipality revoked its in-principle approval based on those objections, without affording the trust an opportunity to respond.

The municipality had argued that its decision was commercial and managerial in nature, as opposed to an administrative decision involving the application of policy. The court disagreed and found that the municipality’s decision was administrative action and subject to PAJA because: 

  • the municipality was acting in terms of legislation and the Constitution when it took the decision; and
  • the rights of the trust and the public, including the constitutional right to the protection of the environment for the benefit of the public, were materially and adversely affected.   

Having found that PAJA applied, the court ruled that the municipality’s failure to afford the trust an opportunity to respond to the objections rendered the decision procedurally unfair.

Accordingly, the court set aside the municipality’s decision and remitted the matter to the municipality for reconsideration, with an order that the trust must be provided with the objections and a reasonable time to respond.     

The case is: Coetzee NO and Another v Mosselbay Municipality (16552/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 435 (15 September 2025).