Court dismisses Sanral application for secrecy on tolls

2014-08-28 13:40

Applications by Sanral and the Protea Parkway Consortium to keep certain court documents on the N1/N2 Winelands Toll Highway project secret, have been dismissed by the Western Cape High Court.

However, Judge Ashley Binns-Ward made certain orders today that would effectively keep categories of information under wraps until the court started to review the decision by the South African National Roads Agency Limited (Sanral) to toll the roads. No review date had yet been set.

Sanral had applied to the court to prevent the City of Cape Town from filing its supplementary founding papers in an open court, based on two categories of information.

The first category related to the proposed project’s costs, which Sanral argued would cause “unjustified and unnecessary concern among the general public” if released prematurely.

It argued it would result in unjustified antagonism and bias towards Sanral by the general public.

Sanral alleged the city, in its supplementary founding papers, was trying to convey, through the use of expert opinions, that the decision to toll was financially untenable.

Sanral asked that the information be kept out of the public domain until it had filed its answering affidavit with its own expert opinions.

Binns-Ward found seeking such relief was unnecessary because all relevant applicants and respondents were bound by the court to use the information only for the review application, and not for a “collateral or ulterior purpose”.

This meant the city was not allowed to disseminate or publish the information because it would amount to contempt of court.

The second category of information in the city’s supplementary founding papers related to the tender process, which was still outstanding. It included commercial information on the bidders, the debt funding competition, and Sanral’s bid evaluation.

Sanral had argued that releasing this before the review hearing “would cause harm and damage to Sanral, bidders in the tender process, the South African fiscus and economy and the general public”.

It said the disclosure of such would fall foul of Sanral’s statutory obligations.

The court held the applicants had failed to present a factual case that proved this category of information should be seen as confidential, and thus no relief was granted.

However, the court found the public and other bidders would in any way not have unregulated access to the court file before the review hearing.

Join the conversation! encourages commentary submitted via MyNews24. Contributions of 200 words or more will be considered for publication.

We reserve editorial discretion to decide what will be published.
Read our comments policy for guidelines on contributions. publishes all comments posted on articles provided that they adhere to our Comments Policy. Should you wish to report a comment for editorial review, please do so by clicking the 'Report Comment' button to the right of each comment.

Comment on this story
Comments have been closed for this article.

Inside News24


Book flights

Compare, Book, Fly

Traffic Alerts
There are new stories on the homepage. Click here to see them.


Create Profile

Creating your profile will enable you to submit photos and stories to get published on News24.

Please provide a username for your profile page:

This username must be unique, cannot be edited and will be used in the URL to your profile page across the entire network.


Location Settings

News24 allows you to edit the display of certain components based on a location. If you wish to personalise the page based on your preferences, please select a location for each component and click "Submit" in order for the changes to take affect.

Facebook Sign-In

Hi News addict,

Join the News24 Community to be involved in breaking the news.

Log in with Facebook to comment and personalise news, weather and listings.