Vukani Gaming Free State (Pty) Ltd v Pillay and Others

Vukani Gaming Free State (Pty) Ltd, an existing route operator of limited gambling machines in the Free State, challenged the decision of the Free State Gambling, Liquor and Tourism Authority to grant a competing route operator licence to Restivox (Pty) Ltd. Restivox’s application, first submitted in 2011, was initially refused, later reconsidered following settlement, granted, set aside on review in 2016, and again reconsidered. In May 2017, after further public hearings and a forensic investigation by Gobodo Forensic and Investigative Accounting, the Authority granted the licence to Restivox. Vukani alleged that the Authority relied on an incomplete or improperly backdated forensic report, failed to consider relevant factors, acted irrationally and without adequate reasons, and that Restivox’s application involved misrepresentations concerning shareholding and directorships. The High Court dismissed Vukani’s review, and Vukani appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld with costs. The High Court’s order was set aside. The review application succeeded, the Authority’s decision to grant the licence was reviewed and set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Authority for reconsideration within 90 days. The operation of the order was suspended pending reconsideration.

The case underscores the duty of administrative decision-makers to act transparently, to consider proper and complete information, and to provide adequate reasons for decisions. It affirms that reliance on unclear, incomplete or manipulated reports renders administrative decisions reviewable under PAJA, and it reinforces judicial scrutiny of licensing decisions in regulated industries such as gambling.