Browsing: High Court in Polokwane

The High Court in Polokwane accepted Musina Local Municipality’s tariff application, even though it was submitted one day late. Judge Makoti found the matter urgent and told NERSA to review the municipality’s request for a tariff change. The court decided that each side should pay its own legal fees. The High Court in Polokwane has ruled that Musina Local Municipality should not lose the chance to request revised electricity tariffs just because it missed the deadline by one day. In a judgment delivered on 3 August 2026, Acting Judge Monare Makoti said the municipality gave a good enough reason for its delay. The judge found that fairness required the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA) to consider the tariff application. Musina Local Municipality took the matter to court against NERSA. Other parties, including Eskom SOC Ltd, the South African Local Government Association (SALGA), National Treasury, and Limpopo Provincial Treasury, were also named in the case, but only NERSA opposed the application. Municipality warns of serious financial impact Musina approached the court urgently when NERSA rejected its electricity tariff application for being just one day late, submitted on 1 April 2026 instead of the 31 March deadline. The municipality said that without a revised tariff, it would face a projected R94 million budget shortfall. This would make it much harder to buy electricity from Eskom and keep delivering services to residents. The municipality also argued the loss could not just be recovered in the next tariff cycle. NERSA opposed the application for several reasons. It said the urgency was the municipality’s own fault, argued the High Court in Polokwane did not have authority because related cases had already been heard in Pretoria, and said the municipality should have taken part in those earlier cases. Judge rejects challenge over court’s authority Judge Makoti disagreed with NERSA’s claim that the Limpopo court was not the right place to hear the matter. The judge said the municipality was not trying to change or overturn another court’s order. Instead, it was simply asking for permission so that NERSA could review an application that was one day late. The court also rejected NERSA’s argument that other pending litigation prevented the municipality from bringing its application. The judge found there was no such pending case. Judge Makoti explained that the argument about other pending cases did not hold up, as there was no ongoing litigation according to the earlier court order. Court accepts one-day delay The municipality explained that it only learned about the new deadline on 17 March 2026, after getting a letter about the updated timetable. It said it had already scheduled public consultations for April and had to speed up the process to meet the new deadline. Despite these efforts, the application was still submitted one day late. Judge Makoti accepted this explanation. The judge noted, “The delay was just one day,” and pointed out that the municipality was trying to balance proper public participation with meeting tight regulatory deadlines. However, the court also criticised the municipality for not making use of an earlier chance to ask for more time when it could have. Judge Makoti said this was not a good enough reason to prevent Musina from asking for leniency. Court says fairness supports municipality The court found that refusing leniency could have serious consequences for the municipality and the people it serves. Judge Makoti noted that NERSA disagreed about whether a tariff review would mean higher electricity prices. The judge said this could only be decided after the application was properly considered. “The real issue is that the municipality and residents could face service delivery problems if the tariff isn’t reviewed,” Judge Makoti said. “I find that fairness supports giving the Municipality the relief it asked for.” What the court ordered The High Court said the application was urgent, accepted Musina Local Municipality’s late tariff submission, and ordered NERSA to consider and decide on the municipality’s request for revised electricity tariffs for 2026/27. Although the municipality won, Judge Makoti decided not to award legal costs. Each side must pay its own fees because the municipality could have acted earlier. Conviction.co.za Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.

What's Hot

Accommodation failures at SAPS and correctional centres undermine public service delivery

High Court tells NERSA to review Musina Municipality’s late electricity tariff application

Johannesburg Labour Court tightens rules for urgent applications and motion proceedings

Browsing: High Court in Polokwane

High Court tells NERSA to review Musina Municipality’s late electricity tariff application

Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

Between a rock and a foul-smelling place

Irregular levy increases, mismanagement, and legal threats in a sectional title scheme

Accommodation failures at SAPS and correctional centres undermine public service delivery

High Court tells NERSA to review Musina Municipality’s late electricity tariff application

Johannesburg Labour Court tightens rules for urgent applications and motion proceedings

Tribunal tells Pension Funds Adjudicator to review rejected disability benefit claim

Latest posts

Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

Between a rock and a foul-smelling place

OUR PICKS

Legal Practice Council ordered to disclose records behind English-only admission exams

Attorney who briefs advocate remains liable for fees unless agreement states otherwise

R112,000 hospital bill reduced to R750, allowing refugee child’s body to be released for burial

Subscribe to Updates

What's Hot

Browsing: High Court in Polokwane