Case Law[2023] ZAGPPHC 2051South Africa
Time Anchor Distillery (Pty) Ltd and Others v Gauteng Provincial Liquor Board (124397/2023; 124405/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 2051 (21 December 2023)
High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)
21 December 2023
Judgment
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 2051
|
Noteup
|
LawCite
sino index
## Time Anchor Distillery (Pty) Ltd and Others v Gauteng Provincial Liquor Board (124397/2023; 124405/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 2051 (21 December 2023)
Time Anchor Distillery (Pty) Ltd and Others v Gauteng Provincial Liquor Board (124397/2023; 124405/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 2051 (21 December 2023)
Download original files
PDF format
RTF format
make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPPHC/Data/2023_2051.html
sino date 21 December 2023
SAFLII
Note:
Certain
personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been
redacted from this document in compliance with the law
and
SAFLII
Policy
IN THE HIGH COURT
OF SOUTH AFRICA
(GAUTENG DIVISION,
PRETORIA)
Date: 21 December 2023
Case number:
124397/2023
(1)
REPORTABLE: NO
(2)
OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO
(3)
REVISED
DATE: 21/12/2023
SIGNATURE
In the matter between:
TIME ANCHOR DISTILLERY
(PTY) LTD
AND 31
OTHERS
APPLICANT
And
THE GAUTENG PROVINCIAL
LIQUOR BOARD
RESPONDENT
(“TIME
ANCHOR”)
AND
Case no: 124405/2023
In
the matter between:
WOOLWORTHS
(PTY) LTD
APPLICANT
and
THE GAUTENG PROVINCIAL
LIQUOR BOARD
RESPONDENT
(“WOOLWORTHS”)
JUDGMENT
MINNAAR AJ:
INTRODUCTION:
[1]
By agreement between the parties, and with
the leave of court, the application with case number 124397/2023
(“Time Anchor”)
and the application with case number
124405/2023 (“Woolworths”) (collectively referred to as
“the applications”)
were consolidated for purpose of
argument. Reference to ”the applicants” and to “the
respondent” is a reference
to the parties as they appear in the
applications.
[2]
In
the applications, the applicants seek an order in terms of Section
6(2)(g)
[1]
of the Promotion of
Administrative Justice Act, 3 of 2000 (“PAJA”) read with
Section 8
[2]
of PAJA and the
common law, for a mandamus order coupled with interim relief against
the respondent.
[3]
In essence, apart from the mandamus to
direct the respondent to do what is expected of it, the applicants
seek an interim order,
pending a decision by the respondent, to
conduct their business as if they were awarded the liquor licenses
applied for.
[4]
The respondent is a public administration
body, subject to its legislation and constitutional controls. Section
195(1)(a) to (h)
of the Constitution provides:
“
(1)
Public administration must be governed by the democratic values and
principles enshrined in the Constitution, including the
following
principles:
(a)
A high standard of professional ethics must be promoted and
maintained.
(b)
Efficient, economic and effective use of resources must be promoted.
(c)
Public administration must be development-oriented.
(d)
Services must be provided impartially, fairly, equitably and without
bias.
(e)
People's needs must be responded to, and the public must be
encouraged to participate in
policy-making.
(f)
Public administration must be accountable.
(g)
Transparency must be fostered by providing the public with timely,
accessible and accurate
information.
(h)
Good human-resource management and career-development practices, to
maximise human potential,
must be cultivated.”
[5]
These kinds of applications are not novel
as they frequently appear on the roll in the various Divisions of the
High Court. It is
concerning that litigants should seek judicial
intervention, regularly, to ensure that the respondent executes its
statutory imposed
mandate. On a broader conspectus, the impression is
created that the respondent is turning a blind eye and deaf ear as to
the obligations
imposed on it in terms of section 195(1) of the
Constitution.
[6]
In
Mohamed and
another v President of the Republic of South Africa and others
[2001] ZACC 18
;
2001 (3) SA 893
(CC) at paragraph 69, the Constitutional Court stated
the following:
"South Africa is
a young democracy still finding its way to full compliance with the
values and ideals enshrined in the Constitution.
It is therefore
important that the State lead by example. This principle cannot be
put better than in the celebrated words of Justice
Brandeis in
Olmstead et al v United States:
"In a government
of laws, existence of the government will be imperilled if it fails
to observe the law scrupulously . . .
Government is the
potent, omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the
whole people by its example ... . If the government
becomes a
lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law; it invites every man to
become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy."”
I am mindful that our
democracy is no longer as ‘young’ as it was in 2001 when
the aforementioned was said by the Constitutional
Court, but it does
not diminish from the requirement that the State should lead by
example. One way of ‘leading by example’
would be for the
respondent to fulfil its statutory duties according to the prescript
and timeframes of the applicable legislation.
NO ANSWERING
AFFIDAVIT:
[7]
In casu
,
the respondent failed to deliver an answering affidavit. Instead, the
respondent, in both applications, delivered a notice in
terms of Rule
6(5)(d)(iii) of the Uniform Rules of Court. In the Rule 6-notice, the
respondent raised the following points of law:
a.
The founding affidavit lacks the necessary
averments to render the application urgent and such actions render
the purported urgent
application materially defective; and
b.
The application discloses no basis on which
the interim relief sought can be granted, alternatively, the founding
affidavit does
not make out a
prima
facie
case for the interim relief
claimed.
[8]
It
is trite that a respondent should, generally, file his answering
affidavit on the merits at the same time as he takes a preliminary
objection on a point of law.
[3]
This is to prevent a situation where, should the legal objection
fail, the court is faced with the situation where the case is
to be
heard without the respondent having filed an answering affidavit on
the merits. The alternative hereto is that the application
has to be
postponed to enable the respondent to prepare and file an answering
affidavit: this will result in an undue protraction
of the
proceedings and piecemeal handling of the matter.
[9]
The absence of answering affidavits was
raised with the respondent’s counsel during argument. The
explanation provided was
that, due to the time constraints imposed by
the applicants, the respondent was unable to properly prepare and
present an answering
affidavit and as such reliance is placed solely
on the contents of the Rule 6(5)(d)(iii) notices.
[10]
The applications were served on 28 November
2023. In both applications the espondent had to deliver a notice of
intention to defend
on 1 December 2023 and deliver an answering
affidavit on 5 December 2023. According to me, the time frames
imposed on the respondent
granted the respondent ample opportunity to
prepare and deliver an answering affidavit. Instead of comforming
with the time frames
imposed, the respondent elected, out of its
volution, to deliver the Rule 6-notice in Woolworths on 8 December
2023 and in Time
Anchor on 10 December 2023.
[11]
In light of the time afforded to the
respondent to deliver an answering affidavit, and its election not to
deliver same, the respondent
is bound by its election to solely rely
on the points of law raised.
[12]
In the respondent’s heads of
argument, various ‘deficiencies’ in the applicants’
papers are pointed out:
heads of argument are not evidence: if the
respondent wanted to present these defences it should have proceeded
to file an answering
affidavit. In such circumstances, it was open
for the applicants to respond to these challenges in their replying
affidavit. Applicants
were devoid of this opportunity. The result is
that, on the merit of the applications, this court only has one
version before it,
and that is the version of the applicants.
URGENCY:
[13]
One of the key requirements of urgency is
for an applicant to make out a case that such an applicant will not
obtain substantial
redress in due course. In this regard, it was
stated by Tuchten J in
Mogalakwena
Municipality v Provincial Executive Council, Limpopo
2016
(4) SA 99
(GP) at paragraph 64:
“
It
seems to me that when urgency is in issue the primary investigation
should be to determine whether the applicant will be afforded
substantial redress at a hearing in due course. If the applicant
cannot establish prejudice in this sense, the application cannot
be
urgent. Once such prejudice is established, other factors come into
consideration. These factors include (but are not limited
to):
whether the respondents can adequately present their cases in the
time available between notice of the application to them
and the
actual hearing; other prejudice to the respondents and the
administration of justice; the strength of the case made by
the
applicant; and any delay by the applicant in asserting its rights.
This last factor is often called, usually by counsel acting
for
respondents, self-created urgency.”
[14]
The applicants’ main contention is
that, due to the clogged rolls in this Division, they will not be
afforded substantial
redress in due course. The applications were
brought as urgent applications as the applicants took steps to obtain
the liquor licenses
to enable them to trade and earn an income. In
conducting their trade and earning an income they will be able to
employ employees
and pay their salaries.
[15]
The applicants trade in the hospitality-,
food- and beverages sectors. They have lodged their applications for
the liquor licences
in time and their rushing to this urgent court is
not to seek preferential treatment to be issued with the licenses
where they,
out of their own conduct, caused a delay in complying
with the applicable legislation. Their rushing to this urgent court
is a
direct result of the ineptitude of the respondent to do what is
required of it, as and when same is required.
[16]
I am in total agreement with what has been
stated by Adams AJ (as he then was) in the case of
Piza
Vino Lynridge (Pty) Ltd t/a Piza & Vino v The Chairperson of
Gauteng Provincial Liquor Board & Another
case number 70433/2016 (Gauteng Division, Pretoria):
“
[19]
By then, the matter had become urgent in the sense that the
restaurant business of the applicant ought to have been up and
running and would have been fully operational but for the fact that
the Liquor License had not been issued. This in turn resulted
in
irreparable damage to the applicant in that it is suffering great
financial loss due to the severe damage to the reputation
of the
restaurant. This, in my view, had resulted from the tardy conduct on
the part of the second respondent.
[20] I find the
conduct of the Respondent unreasonable, I am at a loss to understand
why there is such a delay in finalizing the
application for a Liquor
License.”
[17]
The applicants did not sit by idling. The
applicants engaged with the respondent and enquired as to the
progress of their applications.
Regularly the respondent was urged to
do what is required of it. This is especially so in the Time Anchor
application. When it
became evident that nothing was forthcoming the
applicants elected to proceed with the urgent applications.
[18]
Respondent’s counsel submitted that
the urgency was self-created. I am not in agreement with this. If the
respondent did what
is required by law, then there would not have
been any need to ever approach a court, whether on an urgent basis or
in the normal
course of proceedings.
[19]
This court cannot turn a blind eye to the
applicants’ predicament premised on the technical attack on the
urgency of these
applications. To strike these applications for lack
of urgency and to allow them to follow the normal course on the
motion roll
would be an injustice. The applicants will not be
afforded substantial redress in due course and as such both
applications are
regarded as being urgent and deserving of a hearing.
MANDAMUS APPLICATION:
[20]
This
court has the common law jurisdiction, as well as jurisdiction in
terms of section 6(2)(g)
[4]
,
read with section 8 of PAJA, to issue an order against an
administrative organ, directing it to take a decision in a matter
which
is unnecessarily delayed or where there is a refusal on the
part of the administrative organ to take a decision.
[21]
From the application, it is evident that
the respondent is unnecessarily delaying the taking of the required
decision in respect
of the applications for liquor licenses.
[22]
Section 33(1) of the Constitution provides
that everyone has the right to administrative action that is lawful,
reasonable and procedurally
fair.
[23]
The respondent’s failure to act is
without any basis (especially in light of the absence of an answering
affidavit) and is
prejudicial to the applicant. The applicants are
entitled to the relief that the respondent be directed to consider
and finalise
the applications within a specified period.
[24]
In the applications, the applications
requested a period of 30 calendar days from date of the order. As
this is the festive season,
such a period might be insufficient and
the order will therefore provide for a period of 30 court days from
service of the order.
Service of the order to be effected within a
period of 5 court days from date of the order.
INTERIM RELIEF
CLAIMED:
[25]
The court enjoys a general power or
inherent jurisdiction to grant
pendente
lite
relief to avoid injustice and
hardship (
Airoadexpress (Pty) Ltd v
Chairman, Local Road Transportation Board, Durban and Others
[1986] ZASCA 6
;
1986 (2) SA 663
(A) ).
[26]
A request for an interim interdict is a
court order preserving or restoring the status quo pending the
determination of rights of
the parties. An interim interdict does not
involve a final determination of these rights and does not affect
their final determination.
In this regard the Constitutional Court
said in
National Gambling Board v
Premier, Kwa-Zulu Natal and Others
[2001] ZACC 8
;
2002
(2) SA 715
(CC) at paragraph 49:
“
An
interim interdict is by definition 'a court order preserving or
restoring the status quo pending the final determination of the
rights of the parties. It does not involve a final determination of
these rights and does not affect their final determination.'
The
dispute in an application for an interim interdict is therefore not
the same as that in the main application to which the interim
interdict relates. In an application for an interim interdict the
dispute is whether, applying the relevant legal requirements,
the
status quo should be preserved or restored pending the decision of
the main dispute. At common law, a court's jurisdiction
to entertain
an application for an interim interdict depends on whether it has
jurisdiction to preserve or restore the status quo.”
[27]
The requirements for the granting of an
interim interdict are the following:
a.
A
prima facie
right;
b.
A well-grounded apprehension of irreparable
harm if the interim relief is not granted and the ultimate relief is
eventually granted;
c.
That the balance of convenience favours the
granting of interim relief; and
d.
That the applicant has no other
satisfactory remedy.
[28]
In this regard, Holmes JA said the
following in
Eriksen Motors (Welkom) Ltd
v Protea Motors Warrenton and Another
1973 (3) SA 685
(A):
“
In
exercising its discretion the Court weighs, inter alia, the prejudice
to the applicant, if the interdict is withheld, against
the prejudice
to the respondent if it is granted. This is sometimes called the
balance of convenience.
The foregoing
considerations are not individually decisive, but are interrelated;
for example, the stronger the applicant's prospects
of success the
less his need to rely on prejudice to himself. Conversely, the more
the element of 'some doubt', the greater the
need for the other
factors to favour him. The Court considers the affidavits as a whole,
and the interrelation of the foregoing
considerations, according to
the facts and probabilities; see Olympic Passenger Service (Pty.)
Ltd. v Ramlagan, 1957 (
2) SA 382
(D) at p. 383D - G. Viewed in
that light, the reference to a right which, 'though prima facie
established, is open to some doubt'
is apt, flexible and practical,
and needs no further elaboration.”
[29]
It is undisputed that the applicants
applied for liquor licences and that they have a right to have same
considered and that the
applications either be granted or rejected.
The applicants’
prima facie
right vests in these applications.
[30]
The ineptness of the respondent to act is
causing the applicants prejudice as they cannot conduct their trade
or earn an income.
There is thus a well-grounded apprehension of
irreparable harm if the interim relief is not granted.
[31]
The balance of convenience favours the
applicants as interim relief is granted whilst the respondent
complies with its statutory
imposed duties.
[32]
At this stage, there is no alternative
remedy available to the applicants: their only option was to approach
this court for assistance
herein.
COSTS:
[33]
The applicants only sought costs in the
event of opposition.
[34]
The respondent elected to oppose the
application and I can see no reason why costs should not follow the
outcome hereof.
CERTAIN LICENCES
PROCESSED: TIME ANCHOR APPLICATION:
[35]
At the hearing of the application, counsel
for the applicants informed the court that, in respect of the Time
Anchor applications,
certain applications were processed and the
court was directed to the amended draft order.
[36]
From the amended draft order it would
appear that the applications in respect of the following applicants
were processed:
a.
Fourteenth to Eighteenth;
b.
Twenty-second;
c.
Twenty-fifth and twenty-sixth; and
d.
Twenty-ninth.
[37]
Respondent’s counsel submitted that
there is no evidence before the court to confirm same. I have no
reason to doubt the submission
made by the applicants’ counsel
and as such the order granted in the Time Anchor application echoes
the amended draft order.
ORDER:
Consequently, I make the
following order:
TIME ANCHOR (case
number: 124397/2023):
1.
The Respondent is directed to within 30
(thirty) court days of the date of service of this order to consider
and finalise the pending
applications of the First- to Thirteenth,
Nineteenth to Twenty-first, Twenty-third, Twenty-Fifth,
Twenty-seventh to Twenty-eight
and Thirty to Thirty-second Applicants
and to communicate the decision to the
relevant representative for the Applicants in respect of their
respective liquor licence
applications as follows:
1.1
The
Micro Manufacturers Liquor Licence as
applied for by the First Applicant, TIME ANCHOR DISTILLERY (PTY) LTD,
in respect of a business
to be known as Time Anchor Distillery, and
to be situated at
1[...], D[...] Road, Sandown, Sandton,
Johannesburg, Gauteng Province, with
reference
number GLB7000017050;
1.2
The
Pub
Liquor Licence as applied for by the Second Applicant, CAMP DAVID
(PTY) LTD, for a business known as
Why
Not Exclusive Gay Lounge and Bar
,
and to be situated at
4[...] M[...]
Street, Waterkloof Glen Ext 5, Pretoria, Gauteng Province
with reference number
GLB5000008764
;
1.3
The
Section 28(1)(c) on and
off-consumption
licence
as applied for by the Third Applicant, GILLIEMEAD (PTY) LTD, for a
business to be known as Gilliemead, and to be situated
at
[...]
N[...] Road, Olifantsfontein, Gauteng Province
,
with reference number
GLB6000005960
;
1.4
The
Micro Manufacturer
Liquor
Licence as applied for by the Fourth Applicant, THE GIN GUY (PTY)
LTD, for a business to be known as
Urban
Spirits
and
to be situated at 8[...] J[...] M[...] Street, Brooklyn, Pretoria,
Gauteng Province
,
with reference number
GLB5000011150
;
1.5
(i)
The
Micro Manufacturers Licence as applied for by the Fifth Applicant,
DESERT STORM DISTILLERY (PTY)
LTD
, for a business
known as Desert Storm Distillery, and to be situated at
1[...]
E[...] Road, Koedoespoort Industrial, Pretoria
,
Gauteng Province, with reference number GLB5000011143;
(
ii
)
The Restaurant Liquor Licence as applied for by the Fifth Applicant,
DESERT STORM DISTILLERY (PTY) LTD, for a business known as
Desert
Storm Cafe, and to be situated at
1[...]
E[...] Road, Koedoespoort Industrial, Pretoria
,
Gauteng Province, with reference number GLB5000011144;
1.6
The Restaurant Liquor Licence as applied for by the Sixth Applicant,
CANYON
SPRINGS INVESTMENTS 173 (PTY)
LTD, for a business known as Canyon Springs (trading name Changed to
Café Del Mar), and to
be situated at 1[...] H[...] Road, Menlo
Park, Pretoria, Gauteng Province, with reference number
GLB5000010851;
1.7
The Micro Manufacturers liquor licence as applied for by the Seventh
Applicant,
URBAN NATURE DISTILLING
COMPANY (PTY) LTD, for a business known as Urban Nature Distilling
Company and to be situated at corner
of Lenchen South & South
Street, Zwartkops Ext 4, Centurion, Pretoria, Gauteng Province, with
reference number GLB5000011033.
1.8
The Micro Manufacturers liquor licence as applied for by the Eight
Applicant, ANDREW PETER
GOULD, for
a
business to be known as Ginify and to be situated at 3[...] D[...]
Street, Rooihuiskraal North Ext 36, Pretoria, Gauteng Province,
with
reference number GLB5000010847;
1.9
The Section 28(1)(c) on and off-consumption liquor licence as applied
for by the Ninth Applicant,
KAMCAY
PROPERTY GROUP (PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as Expressions
Café Deli & Coffee Shop and to be situated
at 1[...]
L[...] Drive, South Kensington, Johannesburg, Gauteng Province, with
reference number GLB7000016990;
1.10
The Restaurant liquor licence as applied for by the Tenth Applicant,
CASA DE FUME CC,
for a business to
be known as Casa de Fume and to be situated at corner Witkoppen Road
& Straight Avenue, Lone Hill, Johannesburg,
Gauteng Province,
with reference number GLB700017415;
1.11
The Grocer’s Wine liquor licence as applied for by the Eleventh
Applicant,
EQUESTRIA
2 FAMILY STORE (PTY) LTD,
for a
business to be known as Pick ‘n Pay Linton Corner and to be
situated at corner Lynnwood and Solomon Mahlangu Road, Equestria,
Pretoria, Gauteng Province, with reference number GLB5000011246;
1.12
The 28(1)(c) liquor licence as applied for by the Twelfth Applicant,
CIRCLE SENIOR LIVING (PTY) LTD, for
a business to be known as Circle Senior Living and to be situated at
[...] A[...] Street,
Sandown Ext 24, Sandton, Johannesburg,
Gauteng Province, with reference number GLB7000017230;
1.13
The Micro Manufactures Licence as applied for by the Thirteenth
Applicant, NAKED HOUSE
DISTILLERY (PTY) LTD,
for
a business to be known as Naked House Distillery and to be situated
at [...] D[...] Street, Eastgate Ext 11, Sandton,
Johannesburg,
Gauteng Province, with reference number GLB7000016138;
1.14
The Hotel Liquor Licence as applied for by the Nineteenth Applicant,
CRADLE MOUNT CONFERENCE CENTRE (PTY)
LTD, for a business to be known as Cradle Mount Hotel &
Conference Centre and to be situated
at Plot 5[...], M[...] Road,
Pinehaven, being Plot 5[...] of Portion 187 of the Farm Muldersdrift,
Muldersdrift, Gauteng Province,
with reference number GLB4000003334;
1.15
The Restaurant Liquor Licence as applied for by the Twentieth
Applicant,
THE FOOD ENTERPRISE GROUP
1 (PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as Bossa Silver Lakes and to
be situated at Shop 0[...], Corner
Solomon Mahlangu Drive and
Stellenberg Road, Silverlakes, Pretoria, Gauteng Province, with
reference number GLB5000011264;
1.16
The Micro Manufacturers Liquor Licence as applied for by the
Twenty-first Applicant,
JON DIGITAL
IMPRESSION (PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as Copper Rock and
to be situated at [...] H[...] Road, City Deep,
Johannesburg, Gauteng
Province, with reference number GLB7000017059;
1.17
The Liquor Store Licence as applied for by the Twenty-third
Applicant,
AFRICAN CONCEPT TRADE
(PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as Ultra Liquors (Wilgenheuwel)
and to be situated at Corner Hendrik
Potgieter and Nic Diederichs
Road, Wilgeheuwel, Roodepoort, Gauteng Province, with reference
number GLB7000017171;
1.18
The Sports Ground Liquor Licence as applied for by the Twenty-Fifth
Applicant,
HOLLANDIA FC (PTY) LTD,
for a business to be known as Hollandia Football Club and to be
situated at 8[...] L[...] T[...] Street,
Rietfontein, Pretoria,
Gauteng Province, with reference number GLB5000010635;
1.19
The Liquor Store Licence as applied for by the Twenty-Seventh
Applicant,
LUXURYGIFT (PTY) LTD, for
a business to be known as Luxury Gift and to be situated at 3[...]
S[...] d[...] B[...] Street, Pretoria,
Gauteng Province with
reference number GLB5000008988;
1.20
The Restaurant Liquor Licence as applied for by the Twenty-eight
Applicant, BLACKROSE BOTANICLE
(PTY) LTD, for a business to be known
as Black Rose and to be situated at Walter Sisulu National Botanical
Gardens, 3[...] B[...]
Road, Poortview, Roodepoort, Gauteng Province,
with reference number GLB7000017080;
1.21
The Restaurant Liquor Licence as applied for by the Thirtieth
Applicant, PURELY FROZEN
BY GTS (PTY) LTD, for a business to be known
as
Nome Modern Mediterranean and to be
situated at Shop U[...], Morningside Shopping Centre, Corner Outspan
and Rivonia Roads, Morningside,
Sandton, Gauteng Province, with
reference number GLB7000017419;
1.22
The Restaurant Liquor Licence as applied for by the Thirty-first
Applicant, PTA ON FIRE
(PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as
Fireroom – Village Walk and to be situated at Shop 3[...]
V[...] W[...], 1[...]
O[...] T[...] Avenue, Hazelwood, Pretoria,
Gauteng Province, with reference number GLB5000011253;
1.23
The Micro-Manufacturers liquor licence as applied for by the
Thirty-Second Applicant, IVYLEAGUE
GROUP (PTY) LTD, for a business to
be known as Ivy League and to be situated at 1[...] S[...] R[...]
Service Road, Tulisa Park,
Johannesburg, Gauteng Province, with
reference number GLB7000017394.
2
The Respondent is directed
to within 30 (thirty) calendar days of date of this order, to
finalise the, approved and granted pending
application in respect of
the fourteenth, fifteenth,
sixteenth, seventeenth, eighteenth, Twenty-second, Twenty-fourth,
Twenty-sixth and Twenty-ninth
Applicants
and
to finalise, sign and issue their respective liquor license
application as follows:
3.1
The Restaurant
Liquor Licence as applied for by the Fourteenth Applicant,
GEMELLI
CUCINA BAR (PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as Pantry by Gemelli
and to be situated at Shop N[...], Posthouse Link
Centre, Posthouse
Street corner Main Road, Bryanston, Johannesburg, Gauteng Province,
with reference number GLB7000017121;
3.2
The Hotel
Liquor Licence as applied for by the Fifteenth Applicant,
RIVONIA
BED AND BREAKFAST (PTY) LTD
,
for a business
to be known as
Rivonia Premier Lodge and to be situated at [...] R[...] Road,
Edenburg, Rivonia, Johannesburg, Gauteng Province,
with reference
number GLB7000017032;
3.3
The Restaurant Liquor
Licence as applied for by the Sixteenth Applicant,
KEY
WEST STEAK RANCH (PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as Missouri
Spur Steak Ranch and to be situated at Shop No. 2[...], K[...]
W[...]
Shopping Centre, corner Paardekraal Drive & Viljoen Street,
Krugersdorp, Randfontein, Johannesburg, Gauteng Province,
with
reference number GLB4000003392;
3.4
The Restaurant
Liquor Licence as applied for by the Seventeenth Applicant,
ITALIAN
JOB FOOD EMPORIUM CC, for a business to be known as The Italian Job
Food Emporium and to be situated at Shop No.[...], Posthouse
Link
Centre, Posthouse Street, corner Main Road, Bryanston, Johannesburg,
Gauteng Province, with reference number GLB7000016642;
3.5
The Restaurant
Liquor Licence as applied for by the Eighteenth Applicant,
SHOCK
PROOF INVESTMENTS 143 (PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as Stud
and to be situated at Shop 0[...], Coachman’s Crossing
Shopping, Lyme Park, Bryanston, Johannesburg, Gauteng Province, with
reference number GLB7000017407;
3.6
The Liquor
Store Licence as applied for by the Twenty-second Applicant,
NORTH
SHORE TRADING 123 (PTY) LTD
,
for a business to be known as North
Shore Liquors (Rensburg) and to be situated at Corner of Suttman and
AG Visser Street, Rensburg,
Heidelberg, Gauteng Province, with
reference number GLB8000002883;
3.7
The Liquor
Store Licence as applied for by the Twenty-fourth Applicant,
VAVIMETER (PTY) LTD, for a business
to be known as Spar Murrayfield and to be situated at 7[...] R[...]
Street, Murrayfield Ext
1, Pretoria, Gauteng Province, with reference
number GLB5000011114;
3.8
The Restaurant
Liquor Licence as applied for by the Twenty-Sixth Applicant,
MATJILA
RESTORATION AND LOGISTICS (PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as
Karstie’s Restaurant and to be situated at 3[...]
S[...] d[...]
B[...] Street, Pretoria, Gauteng Province, with reference number
GLB5000011105;
3.9
The Restaurant Liquor Licence as
applied for by the Twenty-ninth Applicant, ARTISAN BAKE SHOP (PTY),
for a business to be known
as Vovo Telo – The Wilds and to be
situated at Shop [...], The Wilds Retail Centre, Corner Country
Estate and Waterfall Drives,
Midrand, Randburg, with reference number
GLB7000017157;
3
The Applicants are authorized to trade in
liquor in their respective businesses as set out in paragraphs 4.1 to
4.32 below, as if
the liquor licences as applied for have been
granted and issued until a final decision in respect of the
respective applications
have been communicated and received by the
respective representatives for the Applicants, and should the
decision be to decline
any of the said applications, an order
authorising the said Applicant to continue trading until such time as
the respective decisions
are finalised on review before the
Honourable Court, provided that such an Applicant has to institute
such review proceedings within
30 (thirty) calendar days of the
decision being communicated and received by the representative/s for
the Applicants.
3.1
The
Micro Manufacturers
Liquor Licence as applied for by the First Applicant, TIME ANCHOR
DISTILLERY (PTY) LTD, in respect of a business
to be known as Time
Anchor Distillery, and to be situated at
1[...],
D[...] Road, Sandown, Sandton, Johannesburg, Gauteng Province, with
reference number GLB7000017050;
3.2
The
Pub
Liquor Licence as applied for by the Second Applicant, CAMP DAVID
(PTY) LTD, for a business known as
Why
Not Exclusive Gay Lounge and Bar
,
and to be situated at
4[...] M[...]
Street, Waterkloof Glen Ext 5, Pretoria, Gauteng Province
with reference number
GLB5000008764
;
3.3
The
Section
28(1)(c) on and off-consumption
licence
as applied for by the Third Applicant, GILLIEMEAD (PTY) LTD, for a
business to be known as Gilliemead, and to be situated
at
[...]
N[...] Road, Olifantsfontein, Gauteng Province
,
with reference number
GLB6000005960
;
3.4
The
Micro
Manufacturer
Liquor
Licence as applied for by the Fourth Applicant, THE GIN GUY (PTY)
LTD, for a business to be known as
Urban
Spirits
and
to be situated at 8[...] J[...] M[...] Street, Brooklyn, Pretoria,
Gauteng Province
,
with reference number
GLB5000011150
;
3.5
(i)
The Micro
Manufacturers Licence as applied for by the Fifth Applicant,
DESERT
STORM DISTILLERY (PTY) LTD
,
for a business known as Desert Storm Distillery, and to be situated
at
1[...] E[...] Road, Koedoespoort
Industrial, Pretoria
,
Gauteng Province, with reference number GLB5000011143;
(
ii
)
The Restaurant Liquor Licence as applied for by the Fifth Applicant,
DESERT STORM DISTILLERY (PTY) LTD, for a business known as
Desert
Storm Cafe, and to be situated at
1[...]
E[...] Road, Koedoespoort Industrial, Pretoria
,
Gauteng Province, with reference number GLB5000011144;
3.6
The Restaurant Liquor
Licence as applied for by the Sixth Applicant, CANYON
SPRINGS
INVESTMENTS 173 (PTY) LTD, for a business known as Canyon Springs
(trading name Changed to Café Del Mar), and to
be situated at
1[...] H[...] Road, Menlo Park, Pretoria, Gauteng Province, with
reference number GLB5000010851;
3.7
The Micro
Manufacturers liquor licence as applied for by the Seventh Applicant,
URBAN NATURE DISTILLING COMPANY
(PTY) LTD, for a business known as Urban Nature Distilling Company
and to be situated at corner
of Lenchen South & South Street,
Zwartkops Ext 4, Centurion, Pretoria, Gauteng Province, with
reference number GLB5000011033.
3.8
The Micro
Manufacturers liquor licence as applied for by the Eight Applicant,
ANDREW PETER GOULD, for
a business
to be known as Ginify and to be situated at 3[...] D[...] Street,
Rooihuiskraal North Ext 36, Pretoria, Gauteng Province,
with
reference number GLB5000010847;
3.9
The Section 28(1)(c)
on and off-consumption liquor licence as applied for by the Nineth
Applicant,
KAMCAY PROPERTY GROUP
(PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as Expressions Café Deli
& Coffee Shop and to be situated
at 1[...] L[...] Drive, South
Kensington, Johannesburg, Gauteng Province, with reference number
GLB7000016990;
3.10
The Restaurant liquor
licence as applied for by the Tenth Applicant, CASA DE FUME CC,
for
a business to be known as Casa de Fume and to be situated at corner
Witkoppen Road & Straight Avenue, Lone Hill, Johannesburg,
Gauteng Province, with reference number GLB700017415;
3.11
The Grocer’s
Wine liquor licence as applied for by the Eleventh Applicant,
EQUESTRIA 2 FAMILY STORE
(PTY) LTD,
for a business to be
known as Pick ‘n Pay Linton Corner and to be situated at corner
Lynnwood and Solomon Mahlangu Road, Equestria,
Pretoria, Gauteng
Province, with reference number GLB5000011246;
3.12
The 28(1)(c) liquor
licence as applied for by the Twelfth Applicant,
CIRCLE
SENIOR LIVING (PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as Circle Senior
Living and to be situated at [...] A[...] Street,
Sandown Ext
24, Sandton, Johannesburg, Gauteng Province, with reference number
GLB7000017230;
3.13
The Micro
Manufactures Licence as applied for by the Thirteenth Applicant,
NAKED HOUSE DISTILLERY (PTY) LTD,
for
a business to be known as Naked House Distillery and to be situated
at [...] D[...] Street, Eastgate Ext 11, Sandton,
Johannesburg,
Gauteng Province, with reference number GLB7000016138;
3.14
The Restaurant Liquor
Licence as applied for by the Fourteenth Applicant,
GEMELLI
CUCINA BAR (PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as Pantry by Gemelli
and to be situated at Shop N[...], Posthouse Link
Centre, Posthouse
Street corner Main Road, Bryanston, Johannesburg, Gauteng Province,
with reference number GLB7000017121;
3.15
The Hotel Liquor
Licence as applied for by the Fifteenth Applicant,
RIVONIA
BED AND BREAKFAST (PTY) LTD
,
for a business
to be known as Rivonia
Premier Lodge and to be situated at [...] R[...] Road, Edenburg,
Rivonia, Johannesburg, Gauteng Province,
with reference number
GLB7000017032;
3.16
The Restaurant Liquor
Licence as applied for by the Sixteenth Applicant,
KEY
WEST STEAK RANCH (PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as Missouri
Spur Steak Ranch and to be situated at Shop No. 2[...], K[...]
W[...]
Shopping Centre, corner Paardekraal Drive & Viljoen Street,
Krugersdorp, Randfontein, Johannesburg, Gauteng Province,
with
reference number GLB4000003392;
3.17
The Restaurant Liquor
Licence as applied for by the Seventeenth Applicant,
ITALIAN
JOB FOOD EMPORIUM CC, for a business to be known as The Italian Job
Food Emporium and to be situated at Shop No.[...], Posthouse
Link
Centre, Posthouse Street, corner Main Road, Bryanston, Johannesburg,
Gauteng Province, with reference number GLB7000016642;
3.18
The Restaurant Liquor
Licence as applied for by the Eighteenth Applicant,
SHOCK
PROOF INVESTMENTS 143 (PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as Stud
and to be situated at Shop 0[...], Coachman’s Crossing
Shopping, Lyme Park, Bryanston, Johannesburg, Gauteng Province, with
reference number GLB7000017407;
3.19
The Hotel Liquor
Licence as applied for by the Nineteenth Applicant,
CRADLE
MOUNT CONFERENCE CENTRE (PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as
Cradle Mount Hotel & Conference Centre and to be situated
at Plot
5[...], M[...] Road, Pinehaven, being Plot 5[...] of Portion
187 of the Farm Muldersdrift, Muldersdrift, Gauteng
Province, with
reference number GLB4000003334;
3.20
The Restaurant Liquor
Licence as applied for by the Twentieth Applicant,
THE
FOOD ENTERPRISE GROUP 1 (PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as
Bossa Silver Lakes and to be situated at Shop 0[...], Corner
Solomon
Mahlangu Drive and Stellenberg Road, Silverlakes, Pretoria, Gauteng
Province, with reference number GLB5000011264;
3.21
The Micro
Manufacturers Liquor Licence as applied for by the Twenty-first
Applicant,
JON DIGITAL IMPRESSION
(PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as Copper Rock and to be
situated at [...] H[...] Road, City Deep,
Johannesburg, Gauteng
Province, with reference number GLB7000017059;
3.22
The Liquor Store
Licence as applied for by the Twenty-second Applicant,
NORTH
SHORE TRADING 123 (PTY) LTD
,
for a business to be known as North
Shore Liquors (Rensburg) and to be situated at Corner of Suttman and
AG Visser Street, Rensburg,
Heidelberg, Gauteng Province, with
reference number GLB8000002883;
3.23
The Liquor Store
Licence as applied for by the Twenty-third Applicant,
AFRICAN
CONCEPT TRADE (PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as Ultra Liquors
(Wilgenheuwel) and to be situated at Corner Hendrik
Potgieter and Nic
Diederichs Road, Wilgeheuwel, Roodepoort, Gauteng Province, with
reference number GLB7000017171;
3.24
The Liquor Store
Licence as applied for by the Twenty-fourth Applicant,
VAVIMETER
(PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as Spar Murrayfield and to be
situated at 7[...] R[...] Street, Murrayfield Ext
1, Pretoria,
Gauteng Province, with reference number GLB5000011114;
3.25
The Sports Ground
Liquor Licence as applied for by the Twenty-Fifth Applicant,
HOLLANDIA FC (PTY) LTD, for a
business to be known as Hollandia Football Club and to be situated at
8[...] L[...] T[...] Street,
Rietfontein, Pretoria, Gauteng Province,
with reference number GLB5000010635;
3.26
The Restaurant Liquor
Licence as applied for by the Twenty-Sixth Applicant,
MATJILA
RESTORATION AND LOGISTICS (PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as
Karstie’s Restaurant and to be situated at 3[...]
S[...] d[...]
B[...] Street, Pretoria, Gauteng Province, with reference number
GLB5000011105;
3.27
The Liquor Store
Licence as applied for by the Twenty-Seventh Applicant,
LUXURYGIFT
(PTY) LTD, for a business to be known as Luxury Gift and to be
situated at 3[...] S[...] d[...] B[...] Street, Pretoria,
Gauteng
Province with reference number GLB5000008988;
3.28
The Restaurant Liquor Licence as applied
for by the Twenty-eight Applicant, BLACKROSE BOTANICLE (PTY) LTD, for
a business to be
known as Black Rose and to be situated at Walter
Sisulu National Botanical Gardens, 3[...] B[...] Road, Poortview,
Roodepoort,
Gauteng Province, with reference number GLB7000017080;
3.29
The Restaurant Liquor Licence as applied
for by the Twenty-ninth Applicant, ARTISAN BAKE SHOP (PTY), for a
business to be known
as Vovo Telo – The Wilds and to be
situated at Shop [...], The Wilds Retail Centre, Corner Country
Estate and Waterfall Drives,
Midrand, Randburg, with reference number
GLB7000017157;
3.30
The Restaurant Liquor Licence as applied
for by the Thirtieth Applicant, PURELY FROZEN BY GTS (PTY) LTD, for a
business to be known
as
Nome Modern
Mediterranean and to be situated at Shop U[...], Morningside Shopping
Centre, Corner Outspan and Rivonia Roads, Morningside,
Sandton,
Gauteng Province, with reference number GLB7000017419;
3.31
The Restaurant Liquor Licence as applied
for by the Thirty-first Applicant, PTA ON FIRE (PTY) LTD, for a
business to be known as
Fireroom – Village Walk and to be
situated at Shop 3[...] V[...] W[...], 1[...] O[...] T[...] Avenue,
Hazelwood, Pretoria,
Gauteng Province, with reference number
GLB5000011253;
3.32
The Micro-Manufacturers
liquor licence as applied for by the Thirty-Second Applicant,
IVYLEAGUE GROUP (PTY) LTD, for a business
to be known as Ivy League
and to be situated at 1[...] S[...] R[...] Service Road, Tulisa Park,
Johannesburg, Gauteng Province,
with reference number GLB7000017394.
4
The registrar is authorized to issue separate
interim orders in respect of each of the businesses in accordance
with paragraph 4.
6
The Respondent is ordered to pay the costs of this application.
Minnaar AJ
Acting Judge of the High
Court
Gauteng Division,
Pretoria
Heard
on:
4
September 2023
For
the Applicants:
Adv.
T C Kwinda
Instructed
by:
The
State Attorney
For
the Respondent:
Adv.
Z Feni
Instructed
by:
Makhafola
& Verster Incorporated
Date
of Judgment:
9
October 2023
[1]
“
A
court or tribunal has the power to judicially review an
administrative action if the action concerned consists of a failure
to take a decision”.
[2]
“
(1)
The court or tribunal, in proceedings for judicial review in terms
of section 6 (1), may grant any order that is just and
equitable,
including orders-
(a)
directing the administrator-
(i)
to give reasons; or
(ii)
to act in the manner the court or tribunal requires;
(b)
prohibiting the administrator from acting in a particular manner;
(c)
setting aside the administrative action and-
(i)
remitting the matter for reconsideration by the administrator, with
or without directions;
or
(ii)
in exceptional cases-
(aa)
substituting or varying the administrative action or correcting a
defect resulting from
the administrative action; or
(bb)
directing the administrator or any other party to the proceedings to
pay compensation;
(d)
declaring the rights of the parties in respect of any matter to
which the administrative
action relates;
(e)
granting a temporary interdict or other temporary relief; or
(f)
as to costs.
(2) The court or
tribunal, in proceedings for judicial review in terms of section 6
(3), may grant any order that is just and
equitable, including
orders-
(a)
directing the taking of the decision;
(b)
declaring the rights of the parties in relation to the taking of the
decision;
(c)
directing any of the parties to do, or to refrain from doing, any
act or thing the
doing, or the refraining from the doing, of which
the court or tribunal considers necessary to do justice between the
parties;
or
(d)
as to costs.”
[3]
Randfontein
Extension Ltd v South Randfontein Mines Ltd
1936
WLD 1
at 4 - 5;
Du
Toit v Fourie
1965 (4) SA 122
(O) at 128G – 129C;
Bader
v Weston
1967 (1) SA 134
(C) at 136E – 137C;
Lipschitz
& Schwartz NNO v Markowitz
1976
(3) SA 772
(W) at 776A – C;
Moskovitz
v Meteor Records (Pty) Ltd
1978 (3) SA 996
(C);
Standard
Bank of South Africa Ltd v RTS Techniques and Planning (Pty) Ltd
1992 (1) SA 432
(T) at 441F – 442J;
Ebrahim
v Georgoulas
1992 (2) SA 151
(B) at 154D - G
[4]
A
court or tribunal has the power to judicially review an
administrative action if-
(g)
the action concerned consists of a failure to take a decision
sino noindex
make_database footer start
Similar Cases
South African Legal Practice Council v Masingi (2023/077988) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1158 (13 September 2023)
[2023] ZAGPPHC 1158High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)98% similar
South African Legal Practice Council v Mokgobi (13023/2020) [2023] ZAGPPHC 22 (20 January 2023)
[2023] ZAGPPHC 22High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)98% similar
South African Legal Practice Council v Sebueng (18628/2022) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1167 (15 September 2023)
[2023] ZAGPPHC 1167High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)98% similar
South African Legal Practice Council v Archary and Another [2023] ZAGPPHC 315; 23101/2021 (2 May 2023)
[2023] ZAGPPHC 315High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)98% similar
South African Legal Practice Council v Munyai (53307/21) [2026] ZAGPPHC 21 (14 January 2026)
[2026] ZAGPPHC 21High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Pretoria)98% similar