Progress Office Machines CC v South African Revenue Services and Others (532/06) [2007] ZASCA 118; [2007] 4 All SA 1358 (SCA); 2008 (2) SA 13 (SCA); 69 SATC 231 (25 September 2007)

Progress Office Machines CC v South African Revenue Services and Others (532/06) [2007] ZASCA 118; [2007] 4 All SA 1358 (SCA); 2008 (2) SA 13 (SCA); 69 SATC 231 (25 September 2007)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the five-year period for the operation of the anti-dumping duty commenced on the retrospective date specified in the notice, namely 27 November 1998, not the date of publication (28 May 1999). The court reasoned that the definitive anti-dumping duty was imposed retroactively from 27 November 1998, and its duration must be limited to five years from that date, in accordance with Regulation 53.1 and the Anti-Dumping Agreement. The court found that any interpretation allowing the duty to endure beyond five years would be unreasonable, inconsistent with South Africa's international obligations, and invalid. The appeal was upheld, and the anti-dumping duty...

Citation
[2007] ZASCA 118
Parties
Appellant: Progress Office Machines CC; Respondent: South African Revenue Service; Respondent: International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa; Respondent: Minister of Trade & Industry; Respondent: Minister of Finance
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 September 2007
Case Number
532/06
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Dismissing Urgent Application for Declaratory Relief
Outcome
Appeal upheld with costs, including costs of two counsel. The order of the court a quo was set aside and substituted with a declaration that the anti-dumping duty had no force and effect from 27 November 2003.
Judges
Scott, Lewis, Heher, Malan, Mhlantla
Legal Topics
Anti Dumping Duties, Customs and Excise Act, Retrospective Legislation, International Trade Agreements, Sunset Review, Duration of Duties
Tax Law Administrative Law Anti Dumping Duties Customs and Excise Act Retrospective Legislation International Trade Agreements Sunset Review Duration of Duties

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Progress Office Machines CC

Appellant

South African Revenue Service

Respondent

International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa

Respondent

Minister of Trade & Industry

Respondent

Minister of Finance

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Dismissing Urgent Application for Declaratory Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the anti-dumping duties imposed by the Minister of Finance in terms of GN R685, Government Gazette 20125 (dated 28 May 1999) in respect of paper products imported from Indonesia had force and effect after 27 November 2003.
  2. 2 Whether the five-year duration of the anti-dumping duty commenced on the retrospective date (27 November 1998) or the date of publication of the notice (28 May 1999).

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the five-year period for the operation of the anti-dumping duty commenced on the retrospective date specified in the notice, namely 27 November 1998, not the date of publication (28 May 1999). The court reasoned that the definitive anti-dumping duty was imposed retroactively from 27 November 1998, and its duration must be limited to five years from that date, in accordance with Regulation 53.1 and the Anti-Dumping Agreement. The court found that any interpretation allowing the duty to endure beyond five years would be unreasonable, inconsistent with South Africa's international obligations, and invalid. The appeal was upheld, and the anti-dumping duty...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld with costs, including costs of two counsel. The order of the court a quo was set aside and substituted with a declaration that the anti-dumping duty had no force and effect from 27 November 2003.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with costs, including the costs occasioned by the employment of two counsel.
  • The order of the court a quo is set aside and substituted with: (a) The anti-dumping duty imposed by the Fourth Respondent in terms of GN R685, Government Gazette 20125 (dated 28 May 1999) in respect of paper products and in particular A4 paper imported from Indonesia, had no force and effect from 27 November 2003....