The Western Cape High Court heard today the South African National Roads Agency’s (SANRAL) public notice regarding the Winelands e-toll project was unlawful due to the failure to take a proper board decision.
Geoff Budlender, an advocate for the City of Cape Town, was quoted by The Citizen as saying SANRAL had been “ducking and diving” in an attempt to conceal the lack of an appropriate decision because it would render their case as invalid.
Budlender’s argument formed part of an attempt for an interdict, which will prevent SANRAL from implementing the N1 and N2 Winelands Toll Highway Project, pending a court review on the legality of the project.
Furthermore, the City of Cape Town is seeking a court order which will force SANRAL to make documents pertaining to the decision-making process available so it can assist the agency with the review.
According to The Citizen, Ashley Binns-Ward, the judge at the hearing, said both the city and the court did not know what evidence SANRAL may lead in the review, which tied in with Budlender’s argument, who said SANRAL did not want the evidence to be known.
“There was no board decision… Sanral entered into a concessionaire contract, which is unlawful,” said Budlender, who added the agency had no right to publish a notice in the 2008 Government Gazette.
According to the City of Cape Town, the decision-making process was flawed due to alleged evidence indicating Marthinus van Schalkwyk, the then environment minister, gave the project the green light based solely on the environmental impact it would have, but not the socio-economic implications it would have on communities in the area.
Chris Loxton, SC, representing SANRAL hit back saying the City of Cape Town approached the issue in an “upside down” manner, arguing the socio-economic impact may be considered only after SANRAL is granted the authority to upgrade the highways, then it will be able to assess how the work should be funded.
Loxton said in court documents the City of Cape Town failed to provide an explanation into why the requested documents are of any relevance and was abusing court processes in order to find a document upon which it could form an argument to block the e-tolling in the province.
“The city appears to hold the view that it is entitled to conduct an inquiry spanning many years, to establish whether or not there is some document that will assist it in obstructing the implementation of the user-pays principle,” said Loxton.
