Kerbyn Cape 2 (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner: SARS (15899/2023) [2025] ZAWCHC 308 (11 July 2025)

Kerbyn Cape 2 (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner: SARS (15899/2023) [2025] ZAWCHC 308 (11 July 2025)

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to hear the review application because the applicant failed to exhaust internal remedies as required by the Tax Administration Act and PAJA. The applicant did not seek a directive from the High Court to bypass the Tax Court, nor did it demonstrate exceptional circumstances justifying such a departure. The mere lapse of time and inaccessibility of internal remedies do not satisfy the duty to exhaust or constitute exceptional circumstances. The applicant's repeated late objections and failure to follow prescribed procedures under the TAA and Tax Court Rules preclude judicial review in the High Court. Condonation for the late filing of the review application...

Citation
[2025] ZAWCHC 308
Parties
Applicant: Kerbyn Cape 2 (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Commissioner: SARS
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 July 2025
Case Number
15899/2023
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed; respondent's points in limine upheld; costs awarded against applicant.
Judges
Mantame
Legal Topics
Tax Administration Act, Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Jurisdiction of High Court, Exhaustion of Internal Remedies, Condonation for Late Filing
Tax Law Administrative Law Tax Administration Act Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Jurisdiction of High Court Exhaustion of Internal Remedies Condonation for Late Filing

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kerbyn Cape 2 (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Commissioner: SARS

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to hear a review application concerning SARS' refusal to condone late tax objections.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant exhausted internal remedies as required by the Tax Administration Act and PAJA before approaching the High Court.
  3. 3 Whether exceptional circumstances exist to justify bypassing the Tax Court's exclusive jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to hear the review application because the applicant failed to exhaust internal remedies as required by the Tax Administration Act and PAJA. The applicant did not seek a directive from the High Court to bypass the Tax Court, nor did it demonstrate exceptional circumstances justifying such a departure. The mere lapse of time and inaccessibility of internal remedies do not satisfy the duty to exhaust or constitute exceptional circumstances. The applicant's repeated late objections and failure to follow prescribed procedures under the TAA and Tax Court Rules preclude judicial review in the High Court. Condonation for the late filing of the review application...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; respondent's points in limine upheld; costs awarded against applicant.

Orders

  • The respondent’s points in limine succeed.
  • The review application is dismissed.