Mabotwane Security Services CC v Pikitup Soc (Pty) Ltd and Others

Pikitup SOC (Pty) Ltd, a municipal entity owned by the City of Johannesburg, invited tenders for security services after the appellant’s fixed-term contract expired. The first tender was cancelled due to budgetary insufficiency and evaluation irregularities. A second, urgent tender was issued but later cancelled after confidential bid documents were compromised. To avoid a lapse in security services, Pikitup appointed Sidas Security Guards (Pty) Ltd on an interim emergency basis. Mabotwane Security Services CC launched two review applications challenging the cancellation of the first tender and the interim appointment. Both reviews were dismissed by the High Court. By the time the appeal reached the Supreme Court of Appeal, the tender periods had expired and Pikitup had insourced security services.

The appeal was dismissed in terms of s 16(2)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013, with costs, including the costs of two counsel.

The case affirms the doctrine of mootness in South African appellate practice and clarifies that courts are not obliged to determine the merits of administrative law disputes where no practical effect can follow. It confirms that constitutional invalidity declarations are subject to the statutory limitation in s 16(2)(a)(i) and underscores litigants’ duties to reconsider appeals rendered moot by supervening events.