, PLEASE USE THIS ASSIGNMENT AS A GUIDE TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS
MSL5901 ASSIGNMENT 1 2026
ANSWERS
DUE DATE: 13 MAY 2026
I. Introduction and background to the dispute
The trilogy of Constitutional Court judgments in AllPay Consolidated Investment Holdings (Pty)
Ltd v Chief Executive Officer of the South African Social Security Agency, Black Sash Trust v
Minister of Social Development, and South African Social Security Agency v Minister of Social
Development represents one of the most significant developments in South African constitutional
administrative law. These cases collectively illustrate how the Constitutional Court balances
legality, administrative justice, and socio-economic rights, particularly the constitutional right of
access to social security under section 27 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996.
At the centre of the dispute is the administration of social grants, a system upon which millions of
vulnerable South Africans depend for survival. The Court was required to determine the
constitutional validity of a large-scale public procurement process and, more importantly, how to
fashion a remedy where strict adherence to legality would have caused catastrophic disruption to
grant payments. The Court’s approach reflects a shift towards context-sensitive constitutionalism,
where remedies are designed not only to correct illegality but also to preserve constitutional rights
in practice (AllPay Consolidated Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd v CEO SASSA CCT 48/13).
II. Facts of the case and issues before the Court
The dispute originated when the South African Social Security Agency (SASSA) awarded a
national tender to Cash Paymaster Services (CPS) to administer the payment of social grants.
AllPay Consolidated Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd, a competing bidder, challenged the award,
alleging that the procurement process was procedurally irregular and constitutionally non-
compliant.
The Constitutional Court in AllPay Consolidated Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd v CEO SASSA CCT
48/13 held that:
MSL5901 ASSIGNMENT 1 2026
ANSWERS
DUE DATE: 13 MAY 2026
I. Introduction and background to the dispute
The trilogy of Constitutional Court judgments in AllPay Consolidated Investment Holdings (Pty)
Ltd v Chief Executive Officer of the South African Social Security Agency, Black Sash Trust v
Minister of Social Development, and South African Social Security Agency v Minister of Social
Development represents one of the most significant developments in South African constitutional
administrative law. These cases collectively illustrate how the Constitutional Court balances
legality, administrative justice, and socio-economic rights, particularly the constitutional right of
access to social security under section 27 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996.
At the centre of the dispute is the administration of social grants, a system upon which millions of
vulnerable South Africans depend for survival. The Court was required to determine the
constitutional validity of a large-scale public procurement process and, more importantly, how to
fashion a remedy where strict adherence to legality would have caused catastrophic disruption to
grant payments. The Court’s approach reflects a shift towards context-sensitive constitutionalism,
where remedies are designed not only to correct illegality but also to preserve constitutional rights
in practice (AllPay Consolidated Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd v CEO SASSA CCT 48/13).
II. Facts of the case and issues before the Court
The dispute originated when the South African Social Security Agency (SASSA) awarded a
national tender to Cash Paymaster Services (CPS) to administer the payment of social grants.
AllPay Consolidated Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd, a competing bidder, challenged the award,
alleging that the procurement process was procedurally irregular and constitutionally non-
compliant.
The Constitutional Court in AllPay Consolidated Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd v CEO SASSA CCT
48/13 held that:
