PFC Properties Proprietary Limited and Another v Commissioner, South African Revenue Services (81483/2019) [2021] ZAGPPHC 419 (17 June 2021)

PFC Properties Proprietary Limited and Another v Commissioner, South African Revenue Services (81483/2019) [2021] ZAGPPHC 419 (17 June 2021)

The court held that Klagsbrun Edelstein Bosman de Vries Inc was duly authorised to represent the Commissioner, South African Revenue Services in the main action. The special power of attorney signed by Mr. Bavuma, together with the authority issued by the Commissioner, constituted sufficient proof of authority under Rule 7. The court found that Rule 7 does not require proof of authority at the commencement of proceedings, but only at the time of the challenge. The applicants' technical objections regarding delegation and the sufficiency of the documents were rejected as exceeding the requirements of Rule 7. The court was satisfied that Klagsbrun had been properly authorised and dismissed...

Citation
[2021] ZAGPPHC 419
Parties
Applicant: PFC Properties Proprietary Limited; Applicant: PFC Integration Proprietary Limited; Respondent: Commissioner, South African Revenue Services
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 June 2021
Case Number
81483/2019
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application to Challenge Authority of Respondent's Attorneys Under Rule 7
Outcome
Application dismissed. Costs awarded against the applicants, jointly and severally.
Judges
Joubert
Legal Topics
Rule 7 Challenge, Power of Attorney, Tax Administration Act, Authority of Attorney, Costs Order
Civil Procedure Rule 7 Challenge Power of Attorney Tax Administration Act Authority of Attorney Costs Order

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

Parties

PFC Properties Proprietary Limited

Applicant

PFC Integration Proprietary Limited

Applicant

Commissioner, South African Revenue Services

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Application to Challenge Authority of Respondent's Attorneys Under Rule 7

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Klagsbrun Edelstein Bosman de Vries Inc was duly authorised to represent the Commissioner, South African Revenue Services in the main action.
  2. 2 Whether the special power of attorney and the authority issued by the Commissioner constituted sufficient proof of authority under Rule 7.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants were justified in persisting with the Rule 7 challenge after the special power of attorney and authority were provided.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that Klagsbrun Edelstein Bosman de Vries Inc was duly authorised to represent the Commissioner, South African Revenue Services in the main action. The special power of attorney signed by Mr. Bavuma, together with the authority issued by the Commissioner, constituted sufficient proof of authority under Rule 7. The court found that Rule 7 does not require proof of authority at the commencement of proceedings, but only at the time of the challenge. The applicants' technical objections regarding delegation and the sufficiency of the documents were rejected as exceeding the requirements of Rule 7. The court was satisfied that Klagsbrun had been properly authorised and dismissed...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed. Costs awarded against the applicants, jointly and severally.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • Klagsbrun Edelstein Bosman de Vries Inc is duly authorised to represent the Commissioner, South African Revenue Services in the action instituted under case number 81483/2019.