Brümmer v Minister for Social Development and Others

The applicant, Mr Stefaan Conrad Brümmer, a journalist, requested access under the Promotion of Access to Information Act 2 of 2000 (PAIA) to records held by the Department of Social Development relating to a government tender (Tender 82) awarded to IT Lynx Consortium. The request was refused by the Director-General and on internal appeal by the Minister, primarily on the basis that disclosure could prejudice ongoing civil litigation and impair the fairness of a trial, relying on section 39(1)(b)(iii)(ee) of PAIA. Mr Brümmer instituted review proceedings in the Western Cape High Court under section 78(2) of PAIA but did so outside the 30-day period prescribed by that section, and sought condonation. The High Court refused condonation, holding that the delay was inadequately explained and that there were no prospects of success on the merits. However, it declared section 78(2) unconstitutional for imposing an unjustifiably short 30-day time limit to approach court, and referred the declaration of invalidity to the Constitutional Court for confirmation.

The Constitutional Court confirmed the High Court’s declaration of invalidity of section 78(2) of PAIA, subject to a reading-in that permits courts to condone non-compliance with the 30-day period where the interests of justice so require. Leave to appeal directly against the refusal of condonation was refused. Costs orders made by the High Court in relation to the constitutional challenge were upheld.

This case is a leading authority on the constitutional requirements applicable to statutory time limits affecting access to information and access to courts. It affirms that procedural barriers must not render the enforcement of constitutional rights illusory. The judgment strengthened the practical enforceability of PAIA by ensuring that courts retain a discretion to condone delays, thereby promoting transparency, accountability, and effective journalism in South Africa.