Department of health eastern cape tenders dating, content_afterad
Nothing turns on this belated induction of the members of the provincial tender board. The Supreme Court of Appeal preferred to decide this matter on the footing that the claim of the applicant is for pure economic loss and that policy considerations precluded a tender board from delictual liability for pure economic damages, sustained merely because of a negligent but bona fide award of a tender.
The existence of such a duty will entail a right in the applicant to sue for damages upon its breach. The applicant submits that the consequence of state liability in delict would not be unduly onerous or expensive.
Final year Cuban Medical students The integration of the medical students who returned from Cuba for final medical studies, commenced in the local medical schools, as part of the NMFC Collaboration Medical Programme to ensure that government has adequate and competent health workforce to sustain the health system.
If public policy is slow to recompense financial loss of disappointed tenderers it should not change simply because of the name the financial loss bears.
I take a different view. It held that the tender board did owe Balraz a duty of care and that in evaluating and awarding tenders it was obliged to act properly and with due care and that in appropriate circumstances delictual liability may lie.
Neither the Act, nor the regulations, 59 nor the tender documents precluded a tender by a company in the process of being incorporated. Both parties agreed that if the Court were to find the conduct of the Tender Board to have been unlawful or wrongful in the sense that it could give rise to aquilian liability, the case should be referred back to the High Court to determine the question of negligence.
However, for the sake of completeness, it found, as did the High Court, that the tender was a nullity at its very inception because on the closing date for submission of tenders Balraz had not been incorporated, it had no legal capacity to accept the invitation to tender and as a result had no standing to attack the tender process as a disappointed tenderer.
But once the order to supply goods and services was made by the Department, Balraz should have curbed its commercial enthusiasm as it was well within its right to require that its initial expenses not lead to its financial ruin should the award be nullified.
Liability would only be imposed if the state acted negligently and if harm was causally connected with the negligent conduct. In all the circumstances I am satisfied that in considering the tenders submitted by Balraz and others, the tender board did not owe Balraz a duty of care and therefore its conduct in avoiding the tender was not wrongful.
On 6 June the High Court found that the decision-making of the tender board had been irregular and administratively unfair.