Hiramun v Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University (045588/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1173 (5 September 2023)

begin wrapper begin container begin header begin slogan-floater end slogan-floater - About SAFLII About SAFLII - Databases Databases - Search Search - Terms of Use Terms of Use - RSS Feeds RSS Feeds end header begin main begin center # South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria You are here: SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria >> 2023 >> [2023] ZAGPPHC 1173 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## Hiramun v Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University (045588/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1173 (5 September 2023) Hiramun v Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University (045588/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1173 (5 September 2023) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPPHC/Data/2023_1173.html sino date 5 September 2023 REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION , PRETORIA CASE NO: 045588/2023 (1) REPORTABLE: NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO (3) REVISED: NO DATE: 05 September 2023 Signature In the matter between : NASHEEL HIRAMUN App li cant And SEFAKO MAKGATHO HEALTH SCIENCES UNIVERSITY Respondent JUDGMENT Munzhelele J [1] The applicant approached this court on an urgent basis for an order on the following: 1.1 Dispensing with the forms and service requirements provided for in the Uniform Rules and allowing this application to be heard as one of urgency in terms of Rule 6 (12). 1.2 Pending the determination of the appeal process , the order granted by the Honourable Madam Justice Kooverjie on Thursday , 25 May 2023 shall be implemented as follows : 1.2.1 The issue confirming the applicant ' s marks in respect of Obstetrics and Gynaecology module is referred to the School Exam inati on Committee for their consideration in terms of Rule G22.3.1 ; 1.2.2 Upon arriving at the decision they are required to furnish the applicant by no later than close of business on 26th June 2023 of his marks and/or percentage as well as written explanat i on as to how the calculation was arrived at in respect of the said module ; 1.2.3 The School Examination Committee are further required to consult with the applicant confirming his final mark/percentage by no later than close of business on 26 May 2023 in respect of the said module ; 1.2.4 In the event that the respondent and or the School Examination Committee deems it necessary the issue confirming the premature registration for year six (6) be referred to the Senate for determination in terms of Rule G27 . 3.1 read with Rule 3.10. 1.2.5 That the costs occas i oned for the relief sought of this notice of motion be borne by the respondent. [2] The matter was contested by the respondent , who subsequently submitted their responding affidavit , articulating the following : 2.1 The respondent asserts that there have been no substantial changes to the application , except for the fact that the applicant has received an extension regarding the commencement date for the internship offered by the National Department of Health . However, this extension is contingent upon the applicant successfully completing his qualification . 2.2 Regarding the matter of urgency , the respondent contends tha t there is no genuine urgency stemming from the contents of the letter , as the internship opportunity remains open to the applicant as long as he qualifies after completing his degree. This is the sole reason for the applicant's r einstatement of the urgent application , which had been removed from the roll on 31 May 2023, due to lack of urgency. [3] Conversely , the applicant contends that the matter should be deemed urg e nt , citing the reason that he has secured an internship set to commence on 1 Ju l y , 2023 . However , from the first glance and perusal of this letter referred to by the applicant , the applicant has inaccurately quoted both the date and the contents of the letter . [4] It is a well-established princ i ple that the applicant must demonstrate the existence of urgency to gain . a hearing on the substantive matter . In this context , to prove urgency , the applicant has attached a letter , which explicitly indicates tha t the province has assigned him for an internship at Helen Joseph Hospital in Gauteng Province , with the stipulation that he may commence the internship upon submission of the required documentation confirming the completion of his qualifications and an active registration with the Health Professional ' s Council of South Africa . Dr . H i ramun's failure to fulfil these requirements on or before 30 June 202 3, would result i n the forfeiture of the internship opportunity, as the department has started with the allocation process for mid - year placements . [5] The applicant has presented the aforementioned as the sole ground for asserting urgency. Firstly , it is important to note that the letter in question does not explicitly state that the applicant will be granted the internship on 1 Ju l y 2023. Instead , it serves as an open-ended communication, signifying that allocation will proceed once the applicant substantiates his qualification status . This letter is essent i ally a standard acknowledgment that the department acknowledges the student's el i gibility for the internship. [6] Secondly , it i s worth highlighting that the applicant easily secured an extension of the internship commencement date to 30 June 2023, following the initia l date of 31 May 2023 , as indicated in the supplementary affidavit. This clearly indicates the readiness of the health department to allocate internships to students once they validate their qualifications . Moreover, it underscores that Sect i on 18 app l ication cannot genuinely be considered urgent under these circumstances . The application can be suitably scheduled for a hearing as part of the opposed mo ti on in accordance with the court rules , without any detriment to the applicant , as the department can consistently extend the internship commencement date . [7] Thirdly , it is pertinent to note that the applicant will still awaits a decision from the examination committee and , subsequently , the Senate ' s deliberation on his matte r, as outlined in the court order by Honorable Justice Kooverjie . If the applicant r emains dissatisfied with the examination committee's decision , the Senate must further r eview his case and render a decision . Consequently , this is an extended process that cannot be swiftly resolved , negating the assertion of urgency in the applicant's Section 18 application. Resolving the applicant's grievances will inherent l y take t i me , rende ri ng this matter non-urgent. Therefore , the application is removed from the roll due to lack of urgency, w i th no order as to costs . M Munzhelele J Judge of the High Court, Pretoria Heard On : 20 June 2023 Delivered On : 5 September 2023 APPEARANCE: For the Appellant: Adv N Raedani Adv L Moela Instructed by : Hlongwane Mavhase Inc For the Respondent: Adv P Ngutshana Instructed by : Mogaswa & Associates Inc sino noindex make_database footer start