Africa-Press – South-Africa. A Limpopo company has lodged an application for leave to appeal a ruling by the Polokwane High Court, which dismissed with costs its bid to set aside a damning Special Investigating Unit (SIU) report.
The ruling involved the relationship between Mphaphuli Consulting (Pty) Ltd and the Fetakgomo Tubatse municipality related to a multimillion-rand electrification contract.
The SIU found the contract the company entered into with the municipality was invalid and unlawful. It was also found the company had overstated its claims.
The company’s relationship with the municipality dates back to 2012 when it was “appointed” as a consultant for “accelerating delivery of electricity to communities”.
In 2015, a contract was entered into for the electrification of 9 500 households, at a contract price of almost R164 million.
An addendum was later entered into, whereby the number of households was increased to 13 325, at a price of R232 million.
A second addendum was then signed, which increased the number of households to 19 178, for an amount of R326 million.
ALSO READ | Covid-19 corruption: SIU cracks the whip, wants swifter action in 224 funding abuse cases
The relationship went sour when the municipality stopped payments because of alleged inflated prices by the company.
Dismissing with costs the application to set aside the SIU report, Judge Gerrit Muller said: “The SIU must perform a fact-finding exercise and is authorised to perform all the functions and powers assigned to it by the SIU Act, including taking the necessary steps to recover any losses suffered by the municipality by instituting proceedings in a Special Tribunal or a court of law for a determination.
“The argument of counsel for the applicant (the company), as I understand it, is that the contractual relationship between the applicant and the municipality was not covered by the terms of reference contained in the (presidential) proclamation.
“The powers to investigate in terms of the proclamation are very wide in its terms, which may include a wide variety of contracts for the procurement of goods, works and services concluded in the periods stated in the proclamation. ”
However, the company, said the court erred in making findings on issues that were not before it.
“In this regard, the court relied on the alleged unlawfulness of the contract and on the institution of action against the applicant (the company) for the recovery of the alleged overstated claims, which the court was not requested to determine,” the company stated.
For More News And Analysis About South-Africa Follow Africa-Press
