Lesedi municipality challenges ‘unlawful’ rates ruling

2026-03-19 - 06:30

The Lesedi Local Municipality in Gauteng has filed an application for leave to appeal a recent judgment by the High Court in Johannesburg declaring its 2024-29 general valuation roll unlawful. This sets the stage for a continued legal battle over property rates. Court ruling highlights procedural failures On 24 February, 2026, the court found the municipality failed to comply with mandatory public notice requirements under the Municipal Property Rates Act before implementing the new roll. The municipality was also ordered to recalculate its rates, credit any overpayments, issue adjusted statements within 60 days and was temporarily barred from pursuing debt collection against ratepayers pending compliance. However, the municipality has argued in its application for leave to appeal filed this week that the ruling was flawed in both fact and law and should be reconsidered by a full Bench or the Supreme Court of Appeal. It contends the court “mischaracterised” the relief sought by the ratepayers. It further argued the applicants did not directly challenge key underlying decisions, such as the valuation roll itself, the rates policy, or council resolutions approving tariffs. Legal framework at the centre of dispute The crux of the appeal is the court erred in treating the matter as a legality review instead of one governed by the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (Paja). According to the municipality, processes such as property valuation and categorisation constitute administrative action and should have been reviewed under Paja. The municipality said setting aside the entire valuation roll affects all ratepayers, undermines municipal budgeting and threatens service delivery. Resident and applicant in the main application, Bouwe Wiersma, said there was nothing materially new in the municipality’s arguments. He said it largely repeats an already rejected stance and still refuses to accept the court’s finding that full compliance with the rule of law, particularly on public participation, was required.