Cape Town - The Cape Town City Council remains confident that the Supreme Court of Appeals' decision on Gauteng e-tolls should not affect the City of Cape Town’s litigation against Sanral to prevent the Winelands Toll Road Project, which includes the tolling of parts of the N1 and N2.
The Supreme Court of Appeals (SCA) dismissed Outa’s appeal against an earlier decision of the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria.
The City of Cape Town's mayoral committee member for transport, Brett Herron, said on Wednesday that the City of Cape Town's case against Sanral, the minister of transport and the minister of environmental affairs differs from the Outa case in a number of respects.
"Our application is to review and set aside the decisions which led to the N1 and N2 being declared toll roads on the basis that these decisions were legally flawed and thus the declaration of the N1 and N2 as toll roads was unlawful," said Herron.
"In addition, and most obviously, the roadworks proposed under the Winelands Toll Road project, have not yet been constructed."
On March 28 2012, the City of Cape Town filed its application in the Western Cape High Court to review the decisions of Sanral, the minister of transport and the minister of environmental affairs, which make it possible for Sanral to toll the N1 and N2 into Cape Town.
"On March 6 2013, and despite our review application having not yet been heard or finalised by the High Court, Sanral gave notice of its intention to conclude a concession contract with the preferred bidder – the Protea Parkways Consortium," said Herron.
"As a result of this notice, it was necessary for the City to launch an urgent interdict application to prevent the conclusion of the concession contract, as well as the commencement of the project pending the hearing of the review application."
On May 21 2013, the Western Cape High Court granted the City that interdict.
That interdict remains in place until the City’s review application has been concluded.
The Court also ordered Sanral to provide us with access to relevant documents that they had previously refused to provide to us.
"The City’s legal advisers are considering the documents, so provided, in order to finalise our review application papers," said Herron.
- Fin24
The Supreme Court of Appeals (SCA) dismissed Outa’s appeal against an earlier decision of the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria.
The City of Cape Town's mayoral committee member for transport, Brett Herron, said on Wednesday that the City of Cape Town's case against Sanral, the minister of transport and the minister of environmental affairs differs from the Outa case in a number of respects.
"Our application is to review and set aside the decisions which led to the N1 and N2 being declared toll roads on the basis that these decisions were legally flawed and thus the declaration of the N1 and N2 as toll roads was unlawful," said Herron.
"In addition, and most obviously, the roadworks proposed under the Winelands Toll Road project, have not yet been constructed."
On March 28 2012, the City of Cape Town filed its application in the Western Cape High Court to review the decisions of Sanral, the minister of transport and the minister of environmental affairs, which make it possible for Sanral to toll the N1 and N2 into Cape Town.
"On March 6 2013, and despite our review application having not yet been heard or finalised by the High Court, Sanral gave notice of its intention to conclude a concession contract with the preferred bidder – the Protea Parkways Consortium," said Herron.
"As a result of this notice, it was necessary for the City to launch an urgent interdict application to prevent the conclusion of the concession contract, as well as the commencement of the project pending the hearing of the review application."
On May 21 2013, the Western Cape High Court granted the City that interdict.
That interdict remains in place until the City’s review application has been concluded.
The Court also ordered Sanral to provide us with access to relevant documents that they had previously refused to provide to us.
"The City’s legal advisers are considering the documents, so provided, in order to finalise our review application papers," said Herron.
- Fin24