Public Protector South Africa v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (84074/19) [2021] ZAGPPHC 467 (15 July 2021)

Public Protector South Africa v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (84074/19) [2021] ZAGPPHC 467 (15 July 2021)

The court found that the Public Protector failed to demonstrate any reasonable prospects of success on appeal. Both the High Court and Constitutional Court had definitively interpreted section 69(1) of the Tax Administration Act to prohibit SARS officials from disclosing taxpayer information to the Public Protector, regardless of her subpoena powers under the Public Protector Act. The Constitutional Court had refused leave to appeal on this issue and confirmed the High Court's interpretation. The Public Protector's arguments regarding constitutional supremacy and the scope of her powers were rejected, as the statutory language was clear and unambiguous. The court held that, absent a...

Citation
[2021] ZAGPPHC 467
Parties
Applicant: Public Protector South Africa; Respondent: Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service; Respondent: Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma; Respondent: Mmusi Maimane; Respondent: Royal Security CC
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 July 2021
Case Number
84074/19
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Condonation and Leave to Appeal Following High Court Judgment
Outcome
Both applications for condonation and for leave to appeal are refused, with costs including the costs of two counsel.
Judges
Mabuse
Legal Topics
Public Protector Powers, Taxpayer Information Secrecy, Subpoena Powers, Condonation for Late Filing, Constitutional Interpretation
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Public Protector Powers Taxpayer Information Secrecy Subpoena Powers Condonation for Late Filing Constitutional Interpretation

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 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Protector South Africa

Applicant

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service

Respondent

Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma

Respondent

Mmusi Maimane

Respondent

Royal Security CC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Condonation and Leave to Appeal Following High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Public Protector has reasonable prospects of success on appeal regarding access to taxpayer information held by SARS.
  2. 2 Whether the Public Protector's subpoena powers under the Public Protector Act override the secrecy provisions of the Tax Administration Act.
  3. 3 Whether condonation for late filing of the application for leave to appeal should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Public Protector failed to demonstrate any reasonable prospects of success on appeal. Both the High Court and Constitutional Court had definitively interpreted section 69(1) of the Tax Administration Act to prohibit SARS officials from disclosing taxpayer information to the Public Protector, regardless of her subpoena powers under the Public Protector Act. The Constitutional Court had refused leave to appeal on this issue and confirmed the High Court's interpretation. The Public Protector's arguments regarding constitutional supremacy and the scope of her powers were rejected, as the statutory language was clear and unambiguous. The court held that, absent a...

Court Disposition

Both applications for condonation and for leave to appeal are refused, with costs including the costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The application for condonation for late filing is refused.
  • The application for leave to appeal is refused.