The Constitutional Court has found in favour of the Department of Transport in its long running battle with Tasima (Pty) Ltd. It ordered that Tasima hand over the electronic National Traffic Information System (eNaTIS) and associated services to the department’s Road Traffic Management Corporation within 30 days of Wednesday’s order.The relationship between the department and Tasima began in 2001‚ when it awarded the company a tender for the provision of services in relation to eNaTIS.The system enables the department to regulate and administer the licensing of all vehicles‚ learner drivers and drivers’ licenses‚ vehicle roadworthiness tests as well as the general implementation of the road traffic legislation.Although the tender awarded to Tasima was meant to run for five years until 2007‚ Tasima had been running the system until now.At the end of the contract in 2007‚ Tasima was given a month-to-month contract to run the eNaTIS until a disputed five-year contract extension signed by the then transport department’s director-general George Mahlalela in May 2010.The department claims the extension was invalid because the department wanted to take over eNaTIS.But it only launched an application to set aside the Mahlalela contract in 2015‚ on the eve of the expiry of the disputed contract.During the period of the disputed Mahlalela extension‚ Tasima had obtained various court orders in the high court in Pretoria between 2012 and 2014. The courts ordered the department to honour the terms of the contract with Tasima.The application by the department against the 2010-2015 contract extension succeeded in the high court in Pretoria in June last year when Judge Wendy Hughes ordered Tasima to hand over the eNaTIS to the department within five days.However‚ the Supreme Court of Appeal held in December last year that the department should not take over eNaTIS and its services without adhering to the conditions of the disputed contract signed in 2010.It also held that the department was in contempt of various court orders passed between 2012 and 2014.The Constitutional Court wrote four judgments.In the majority judgment written by Justice Sisi Khampepe‚ where four other judges concurred‚ she said the extension of the contract in 2010 stood to be set aside."From 23 June 2015‚ the date of Hughes J's order‚ the extension no longer had legal effect‚ and the interim interdicts issued by the high court fell away."Nevertheless‚ in the period between the granting of the extension and its setting aside (May 2010 to August 2015)‚ the applicants were constitutionally obliged to comply with the various court orders granted‚" Khampepe said.Khampepe said in this case‚ not only was the extension of the contract between the department and Tasima unlawful‚ but it had now expired."It can only be in the best interests of the public that the hand-over of the services and the eNaTIS to the Corporation happens as expeditiously as possible." - TMG Digital..