Road Accident Fund and Others v Mabunda Incorporated and Others; Minister of Transport v Road Accident Fund and Others

The Road Accident Fund (RAF), an organ of state, had contracted a panel of attorneys under a 2014 tender governed by service level agreements (SLAs), which were due to expire in November 2019. In anticipation of expiry, the RAF issued a new tender in November 2018 for a fresh panel of attorneys. After appointing a new CEO and later a new permanent Board, the RAF adopted a new strategic plan aimed at reducing legal costs by insourcing legal services and relying primarily on in‑house lawyers and the State Attorney. In February 2020, the RAF required panel attorneys who had signed an SLA addendum extending services to May 2020 to begin handing over files, and it cancelled the 2018 tender, citing unaffordability and changed circumstances. Several law firms and attorney associations brought review applications in the Gauteng High Court, which set aside both the handover decision and the tender cancellation, ordered continuation of the panel attorneys for six months, and reinstated the tender. The RAF appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA).

The Minister of Transport’s appeal was struck from the roll with costs. The RAF’s appeal was reinstated and upheld with costs. The order of the Gauteng High Court was set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the review applications with costs, including costs of two counsel where employed.

The case clarifies the lawful grounds on which organs of state may cancel tenders under Regulation 13(1) of the Preferential Procurement Regulations and confirms that changed operational models and lack of funds can constitute valid grounds. It affirms that delegations of authority survive changes in governance structures and reinforces principles of mootness in appellate proceedings. The judgment is important for public procurement governance and administrative‑law review of tender cancellations.