Outa fails to block Eskom’s 9.4% hike

Pretoria - The implementation of the 9.4 electricity increase will go ahead on Friday after the Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse (Outa) failed in its 11th hour urgent high court application in Pretoria to halt the increase.
Outa wanted to interdict Eskom for 30 days from implementing the tariff increase until it had the opportunity to study the reasons advanced by the National Energy Regulator of SA (Nersa) for allowing Eskom to implement the hike.
Judge J L Manamela said Outa would settle for an interdict of 10 days if the court was not inclined to grant it a 30-day reprieve.
Outa initially asked that Nersa be forced to provide it with the written reasons within 14 days of the court order, but this was abandoned after the reasons were forwarded on Wednesday.
This prompted the judge to ask whether the application was not now academic, but advocate Dolf Raath, acting for Outa, said the organisation wanted to study the reasons before deciding on a way forward.
It, however, wanted to do this before the price hike came into effect. He said it may or may not decide to take the matter forward after studying the reasons.
Raath argued that once the tariff hike had been implemented and later reversed, it would be near impossible to retrieve the inflated amounts charged to the public.
He said that in terms of section 10(2) of the National Energy Regulation Act, Outa was entitled to know the reasons at the time of Nersa granting Eskom permission for the increase.
Raath said the reasons should have accompanied the decision.
Nersa until this week declined to provide the details, stating that it might contain confidential information.
Raath wanted an order to declare that, in terms of the law, Nersa was obliged to provide reasons for the increase.
He said that if the increase was implemented, the proverbial horse would have bolted and the decision would be irreversible.
According to him, the burden for Eskom to again adjust the accounts of its millions of consumers, including the 278 municipalities in South Africa, was of such magnitude that it was unlikely to be done.
Advocate Denis Fine, for Nersa, questioned how Outa could ask for a far-reaching order by interdicting the pay hike while it was not even sure at this point whether it would fight the increase.
Advocate Jeremy Gauntlett remarked that “this fly should not have buzzed at all”. He said the application was defective and “a legal absurdity”.
He said nothing stopped Outa, if it so chose, to later launch an application to review and set aside the price hike.
A group of Eastern Cape businesses, which launched review proceedings against the tariff hike, told the judge earlier that their application would be heard sometime in June. Gauntlett said Outa could join them in their legal bid if it wanted to.
Judge Manamela late on Thursday afternoon dismissed Outa’s application, slapping it with the legal costs. He said he would provide written reasons for his judgment next Friday.