Medirite (Pty) Limited v South African Pharmacy Council and Another

Medirite (Pty) Limited, a subsidiary of Shoprite Checkers, operated pharmacies located within supermarkets under a business model that relied on open access and foot traffic. The South African Pharmacy Council (SAPC), established under the Pharmacy Act 53 of 1974, amended the Rules Relating to Good Pharmacy Practice in March 2012. The amendment introduced requirements that pharmacies situated within other businesses be demarcated by permanent, solid, floor-to-ceiling structures with single points of entry and exit. Medirite contended that these requirements would require costly construction, disrupt its business model, and were unnecessary given existing compliance with prior demarcation rules. After unsuccessful representations, Medirite sought judicial review of the amendment under the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 (PAJA). The High Court dismissed the review application, and Medirite appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld with costs, including the costs of two counsel. The order of the High Court was set aside and replaced with an order reviewing and setting aside the SAPC's amendment to section 1.2.2 of Annexure A to the Rules Relating to Good Pharmacy Practice insofar as it introduced subsections (b), (c), and (d).

This case is significant for South African administrative law as it reinforces the principles of rationality, reasonableness, and proportionality in regulatory decision-making. It underscores that even expert regulatory bodies must justify onerous regulatory measures with evidence and reasoning, and must consider less restrictive alternatives. The judgment affirms the application of PAJA to subordinate legislative actions such as professional rules and highlights the limits of regulatory discretion.