The Electoral Court has handed down two significant decisions shaping South African political and electoral jurisprudence, granting the GOOD Party leave to appeal a major party funding ruling, while dismissing a DA bid to block ActionSA from supplementing its proportional representation (PR) councillor lists.

The GOOD Party and its secretary-general Brett Herron have been granted leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) following a unanimous judgment by the Electoral Court.

The court acknowledged that the legal and factual arguments raised by GOOD present "reasonable prospects of success" and that another court could plausibly reach a different conclusion.

The legal battle stems from allegations that the GOOD party failed to report a financial donation under the Political Party Funding Act.

The initial complaint was brought forward by former DA member Shaun August, who was subsequently dismissed from GOOD for alleged financial misconduct and “unbecoming behaviour”.

In its application for leave to appeal, GOOD argued that the court overlooked undisputed evidence from Israel Govender, who stated he was explicitly instructed by August to keep the donation arrangement confidential, ensuring the party’s leadership remained unaware of it.

GOOD further contended that August's credibility was compromised owing to the acrimonious nature of his departure from the party.

The party asserted it was never provided with the forensic report or given an opportunity to respond before the Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC) approached the court.

Herron said the evidence presented did not conclusively establish that the party’s executive leadership had knowledge of the financial arrangement.

The party argued that administrative fines are discretionary and should not have been punitively enforced during the early, transitional phases of the Act’s implementation.

"Parties, donors, and the IEC all need clarity on how the Political Party Funding Act is enforced and on the procedural safeguards that apply before penalties are imposed," Herron said, welcoming the opportunity for the SCA to settle these statutory questions. Costs for the application will follow the outcome of the main appeal.

Meanwhile, in a separate matter, ActionSA has welcomed an Electoral Court judgment dismissing a lawsuit brought by the DA.

The DA’s application sought to declare ActionSA’s submission of a single-name PR list unlawful and unconstitutional under the Municipal Electoral Act, attempting to disqualify the party from supplementing its councillor lists following the 2026 municipal elections.

The Electoral Court rejected all substantive relief sought by the DA, which included requests to compel the IEC to declare ActionSA’s PR list invalid, prohibit the party from supplementing its lists post-election, and restrict list adjustments until after the first sitting of municipal councils.

ActionSA national chairperson Michael Beaumont criticised the DA's legal strategy, labelling it "stillborn, comically hypocritical, and littered with anti-democratic tendencies".

Beaumont pointed out that the DA itself had submitted single-name PR lists in at least 13 municipalities during the 2026 elections and had historically benefited from list supplementation.

He further stated that if the DA was successful, it would have effectively disenfranchised 25% of the South African electorate by nullifying their votes and allowing councils to elect mayors without full PR.

ActionSA framed the legal victory as a validation of its growing governance footprint, particularly in the City of Tshwane where the party leads the local government, asserting that the judgment signals a shift away from traditional multi-party dynamics in major metropolitan areas.