The continuity of water services remains a crucial consideration, since Johannesburg Water’s water supply issues are ‘well documented and cannot be overlooked’. Picrture: Johannesbug Water’s LinkedIn page A Johannesburg Water SOC Ltd tender award to two companies for the supply and delivery of potable water on an “as and when required” basis for a period of 36 months has been set aside and declared invalid by the High Court in Johannesburg. Judge Evette Dippenaar ruled that Johannesburg Water’s tender lapsed before any award was made, and reviewed and set aside the award to Builtpro Construction (Pty) Ltd and Nutinox (Pty) Ltd, declaring it constitutionally invalid.
Judge Dippenaar further declared that all and any service level agreements concluded between Johannesburg Water and Builtpro Construction and Nutinox related to the award of the tender are constitutionally invalid and set them aside. However, she suspended the declarations of invalidity and the setting aside of the tender awards to the two companies and all service level agreements for a period of 150 calendar days to enable Johannesburg Water to commence and conclude a new tender process for appointing service providers. Judge Dippenaar said, despite the question marks surrounding the agreements with Builtpro Construction and Nutinox, the continuity of services to the communities served by Johannesburg Water remains a key consideration.
“The water issues experienced by consumers are well documented and require no repetition. “Continuity of supply of the services forming the subject matter of the tender is of great importance to the public at large, and specifically to the communities involved,” she said. Judge Dippenaar added that, in considering a just and equitable remedy, it is necessary to take the matter’s past history into account.
Read Full Article on The Citizen
[paywall]
She said Johannesburg Water had to seek various extensions of the bid validity period, and for present purposes, it is irrelevant whether those extensions were validly sought or not. “History has proved that the 90-day bid period was insufficient.
[/paywall]
