KwaZulu-Natal Joint Liaison Committee v Member of the Executive Council, Department of Education, KwaZulu-Natal and Others

The applicant, an association representing independent schools in KwaZulu-Natal, relied on a provincial Department of Education circular dated 22 September 2008 which set out 'approximate' subsidy levels for independent schools for the 2009 school year. Schools budgeted on the basis of this notice. In May 2009, the Department issued a further circular indicating that subsidies would be reduced by up to 30% due to a provincial cash crisis. Ultimately, subsidies paid during 2009 were approximately 30% less than the amounts indicated in the 2008 notice. The applicant sought to enforce payment of the alleged shortfall, contending that the 2008 notice constituted a binding promise or contract. The KwaZulu-Natal High Court dismissed the claim, holding that the term 'approximate' rendered the amounts too uncertain to be enforceable. Leave to appeal was refused by the High Court and the Supreme Court of Appeal, after which the applicant approached the Constitutional Court.

Leave to appeal was granted, but the appeal was dismissed. The High Court’s dismissal of the application was upheld, with costs.

The case clarifies the distinction between contractual obligations and public-law undertakings by government, particularly in the context of subsidies granted under statutory frameworks. It underscores that not all governmental promises or circulars give rise to enforceable contracts and that litigants must properly frame claims grounded in administrative law under PAJA. The judgment also highlights the constitutional context of education funding and the limits of judicial enforcement where budgetary and statutory discretion are implicated.