The Gauteng Gambling Board v Silverstar Development Limited and Others

The Gauteng Gambling Board invited applications for up to six casino licences in Gauteng. Silverstar Development Limited and Rhino Hotel and Resort Limited were the only applicants for the West Rand area. After an extensive evaluation process, the Board preferred Rhino and sought concurrence from the Gauteng Executive Council (Exco). Exco initially supported Silverstar but ultimately concurred with Rhino. Subsequent litigation led to Exco’s decision being set aside for lack of rational explanation. Rhino later lost environmental approval due to World Heritage status being granted to its proposed site, rendering its project unviable. A joint amended application by Rhino and Silverstar was later approved but set aside on review as an impermissible substitution of applications. Silverstar then requested the Board to grant its original application. The Board refused, relying on its 1998 reasons for preferring Rhino. Silverstar successfully reviewed this refusal in the High Court, which not only set aside the Board’s decision but substituted it with an order directing the grant of a licence to Silverstar. The Board appealed only against the substitution order.

The appeal was dismissed. The order of the High Court directing the Gauteng Gambling Board to grant a casino licence to Silverstar Development Limited was upheld.

The case is a leading South African authority on when courts may substitute administrative decisions on review. It clarifies the application of s 8 of PAJA and reinforces that substitution is justified where remittal would be futile, unfair, or cause undue delay, particularly where the administrator has already effectively made up its mind.