Special Investigating Unit v Chauke Quantity Surveyors & Project Management in association with listed entities and Others (45529/16) [2020] ZAGPJHC 257

27th October 2020

Special Investigating Unit v Chauke Quantity Surveyors & Project Management in association with listed entities and Others (45529/16) [2020] ZAGPJHC 257

Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii

[1] Pursuant to a public procurement process, the Department of Public Works (the department) and an association of architects, quantity surveyors and engineers concluded a written ‘Standard Professional Services Contract’ on 12 October 2007, in terms whereof the consultants comprising the association performed civil, structural, electrical and mechanical engineering, quantity surveying and architectural services to the department during the period 2008 to 2013 in connection with the construction of one-stop border facilities at the Lebombo Port of Entry between South Africa and Mozambique. As at November 2013, they were paid a total amount of R84 477 774.99 (excl. VAT) in respect of their professional fees and an amount of R5 876 344.30 (excl. VAT) for their disbursements; the total amount inclusive of VAT being R103 003 696.00.

[2] The first respondent, Chauke Quantity Surveyors & Project Managers in Association with Listed Entities, is the unincorporated association of professional service providers consisting of the second respondent, Lucas Chauke Quantity Surveyors CC, the third respondent, Co-Arc International Architects Inc, the fourth respondent, Aziz Tayob Architects Inc, the fifth respondent, Malani Padayachee & Associates (Pty) Ltd, the sixth respondent, George Barbic & Associates CC, the seventh respondent, Marepo CC, the eighth respondent, Nathoo Mbenyane Engineers CC, and the ninth respondent, Letchmiah Daya Mandindi Jhb Inc. trading as Chauke Mbenyane Co-Arc Consultants, provided the professional services to the department (the consortium).  The Minister of Public Works (the minister) is the tenth respondent.  He is cited in his official capacity as the executive authority responsible for the department, and no relief is claimed against him.