Maifadi v Minister of Correctional Services and Another (037393/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 169 (25 February 2025)

25 Reportability
Administrative Law

Brief Summary

Contempt of Court — Compliance with court order — Applicant sought costs against Minister of Correctional Services for late compliance with a court order to consider parole — Minister complied over a year late, failing to inform the applicant or the court — Court held Minister liable for costs due to undue delay and lack of communication.

About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
>>
2025
>>
[2025] ZAGPPHC 169
|

|

Maifadi v Minister of Correctional Services and Another (037393/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 169 (25 February 2025)

REPUBLIC
OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG
DIVISION, PRETORIA
Case
Number:
037393/2023
(1)
REPORTABLE: NO
(2)
OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO
(3)
REVISED: YES
DATE
25 February 2025
SIGNATURE
In
the matter between:
MPHO
MAIFADI
Applicant
and
THE
MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES
First Respondent
THE
CHAIRPERSON OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL
Second Respondent
FOR
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES
JUDGMENT
CRUTCHFIELD
J
[1]
The applicant, Mpho Maifadi, brought
proceedings for the first respondent, the Minister of Correctional
Services (“the Minister”),
to be held in contempt for
failure to comply with an order of this court dated 24 August 2023
(“the Order”).
[2]
The Minister opposed the proceedings, as
did the second respondent, the Chairperson of the National Council
for Correctional Services.
[3]
At the outset of the hearing, the
applicant’s legal representative informed me that the only
issue for determination by me
was the costs of the application as the
Minister had complied with the Order, albeit more than one year after
the date upon which
the Minister ought to have done so in terms of
the Order. Accordingly, the applicant sought costs of the
application, which the
respondents resisted.
[4]
The Order provided that the Minister
consider the applicant for parole by 31 August 2023. The terms of the
Order were agreed to
by the parties and obliged the Minister to
consider the applicant for parole by 31 August 2023. The Minister
failed to comply with
the terms of the Order by the agreed date of 31
August 2023, forcing the applicant to institute the application
before me.
[5]
The Minister argued that the
processes undertaken by the parole board prevented the Minister from
complying with his obligations
under the Order. Those processes and
the time required to complete them, however, were within the
knowledge of the Minister at
the time that the parties agreed to
compliance by the Minister in terms of the Order, by 31 August 2023.
Accordingly, the   processes
undertaken by the parole board
do not allow the Minister to escape the consequences of his inaction
in respect of his obligations
under the Order.
[6]
The applicant informed his legal
representatives on Monday 17 February 2025, the first day of the week
during which the matter was
set down for hearing, that the Minister
complied with the Order during October 2024, more than one year after
the Minister was
obliged to comply with the Order. Notwithstanding,
the respondents failed to inform the applicant’s legal
representatives
as well as this court that they had complied with the
order.
[7]
The applicant’s legal representatives
do not have easy access to the applicant who remains incarcerated,
and communication
with the applicant in prison is not easy. The
respondents knew that they had complied but permitted the application
to be set down,
the attendant processes to be undertaken and costs to
be incurred. Given that the applicant remains incarcerated, I am of
the view
that the Minister should be liable for the costs of the
application on scale B as it took in excess of one year for the
Minister
to comply with the order. Thereafter, the Minister failed to
inform the applicant that compliance had been achieved.
[8]
In the circumstances, I grant the following
order:
1.
The first respondent, the Minister of
Correctional Services, is ordered to pay the costs of this
application on scale B.
CRUTCHFIELD J
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
For the Applicant:
Mr T.G Mokgara
(Attorney with right of appearance) instructed by Mogkara
Attorneys.
For the Respondent’s:
Adv L Sefudi instructed by State
Attorney Pretoria.
Date of hearing:
21 February 2025.
Date of Judgment:
25 February 2025.