- CPUT has failed to halt a regulatory process that could lead to the suspension of its Dental Technology programme.
- Judge Mapoma found that the Dental Technicians Council had not yet made a decision to suspend the degree.
- The university was ordered to pay the legal costs of its unsuccessful urgent application.
The Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT) has lost its attempt to stop a regulatory process that could see its Bachelor of Health Science in Dental Technology programme suspended.
The High Court in Cape Town dismissed the university’s urgent application, finding that the South African Dental Technicians Council was still running a statutory consultation process and had not yet reached a final decision about the programme. Acting Judge ZL Mapoma also ordered CPUT to pay the respondents’ legal costs, including the costs of two counsel.
Accreditation dispute reaches the High Court
The dispute began when the South African Dental Technicians Council told CPUT on 11 August 2026 that it intended to seek the Minister of Health’s consent to suspend the programme due to alleged failures to meet accreditation requirements.
CPUT argued that the possible suspension threatened a separate review application pending in Pretoria, where it is challenging the council’s accreditation criteria along with Tshwane University of Technology and Durban University of Technology. The university asked the court to keep things as they are until those review proceedings are finalised.
The council opposed the application, insisting that it had not suspended the programme and had only invited CPUT to make representations within 30 days before deciding whether to approach the minister.
Judge says no suspension decision exists
Judge Mapoma found the university’s concerns were premature because the council had only begun the first stage of the statutory process. The judgment records that the council informed CPUT it would consider the university’s representations “with an open mind” before deciding whether to request the minister’s consent to suspend the programme.
The court held that there is a clear difference between starting a consultation process and making a final regulatory decision, so the programme stayed operational while the process continued.
Court rejects claim of predetermined outcome
CPUT argued that the council had already made up its mind to suspend the programme, referring to an earlier dispute in March 2026 when the programme was temporarily suspended.
Judge Mapoma rejected this, writing, “The argument that the Council has made up its mind to suspend the programme is not sustainable. It is not backed by facts… It is simply based on suspicion against the regulatory body.” The judge concluded that the council was entitled to fulfil its statutory duties in line with the law.
University must engage the consultation process
The court found that CPUT had an adequate alternative by participating in the council’s consultation process instead of seeking urgent relief from the court.
Judge Mapoma said, “The CPUT has no prima facie right to refuse to participate in a statutory process of the Council, in performance of its regulatory functions.”
He added that making representations would not harm the university’s pending review application and could help the council consider alternatives to suspension.
Costs follow the result
The court found CPUT had not shown urgency, a prima facie right, irreparable harm, or that the balance of convenience favoured intervention, and dismissed the urgent application.
CPUT was ordered to pay the respondents’ legal costs, including the costs of two counsel.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
