Siyabulela Mapompo v King Sabata Dalindyebo Local Municipality and Another

The applicant, Siyabulela Mapompo, is a resident of Mthatha whose electricity supply to his home was terminated by the King Sabata Dalindyebo Local Municipality on 26 May 2025 due to arrears on his municipal account amounting to R44 034.65. The applicant admitted owing the debt and making sporadic payments, but alleged that the municipality disconnected his electricity without giving the required pre-termination notice in terms of its Credit Control and Debt Collection Policy. The municipality contended that a notice dated 29 April 2025 was served by placing it in a mailbox near the gate. The applicant denied receiving the notice and produced evidence that no mailbox existed on the property. The disconnection caused hardship to the applicant and his family, including health, security and educational prejudice to his minor children. The applicant brought an urgent application seeking interim relief restoring electricity pending final determination.

A rule nisi was issued, returnable on 24 June 2025, calling upon the respondents to show cause why the termination of electricity should not be declared unlawful. Pending final determination, the municipality was ordered to reconnect the electricity supply forthwith, interdicted from charging a reconnection fee, and ordered to pay costs on scale B. Urgency was condoned.

The case reinforces the procedural fairness obligations of municipalities when enforcing credit control measures, particularly the requirement of proper pre-termination notice. It affirms that non-payment alone does not justify bypassing fair procedure and that vulnerable consumers may obtain urgent interim relief where basic services are disconnected unlawfully. The judgment also aligns High Court practice with Constitutional Court jurisprudence on notice and participatory rights in administrative action.