Cyril and Another v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (186/2023) [2024] ZASCA 32 (28 March 2024)

Cyril and Another v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (186/2023) [2024] ZASCA 32 (28 March 2024)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the order granting SARS leave to intervene in the review application is interlocutory and does not dispose of any portion of the relief claimed in the review application nor is it definitive of the rights of the parties in the review or criminal trial. The court found that the interests of justice do not require the order to be treated as appealable, as no prejudice or injustice would result from allowing the order to stand. The intervention order does not affect the appellants' fair trial rights, nor does it equate to participation in the criminal trial. The court emphasized the need to avoid piecemeal litigation and concluded that the second...

Citation
[2024] ZASCA 32
Parties
Appellant: Walter Eleazar Cyril; Appellant: Letisha Cyril; Respondent: Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 March 2024
Case Number
186/2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Order Granting Leave to Intervene in Review Application
Outcome
Appeal struck from the roll with costs, including costs of the application for leave to appeal and costs consequent on the employment of two counsel.
Judges
Gorven, Kgoele, Coppin, Smith, Keightley
Legal Topics
Appealability of Interlocutory Orders, Customs and Excise Act, Review of Evidentiary Rulings, Standing to Intervene, Costs on Appeal
Civil Procedure Tax Law Appealability of Interlocutory Orders Customs and Excise Act Review of Evidentiary Rulings Standing to Intervene Costs on Appeal

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Walter Eleazar Cyril

Appellant

Letisha Cyril

Appellant

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Order Granting Leave to Intervene in Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order granting SARS leave to intervene in the review application is appealable.
  2. 2 Whether the intervention order disposes of any portion of the relief claimed in the review application.
  3. 3 Whether the interests of justice require the intervention order to be treated as appealable.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the order granting SARS leave to intervene in the review application is interlocutory and does not dispose of any portion of the relief claimed in the review application nor is it definitive of the rights of the parties in the review or criminal trial. The court found that the interests of justice do not require the order to be treated as appealable, as no prejudice or injustice would result from allowing the order to stand. The intervention order does not affect the appellants' fair trial rights, nor does it equate to participation in the criminal trial. The court emphasized the need to avoid piecemeal litigation and concluded that the second...

Court Disposition

Appeal struck from the roll with costs, including costs of the application for leave to appeal and costs consequent on the employment of two counsel.

Orders

  • The appeal is struck from the roll with costs.
  • Such costs include the costs of the application for leave to appeal.