Simply Fish Moreleta Park CC and Others v Tshwane Local Committee of the Gauteng Liquor Board (20158/2006) [2007] ZAGPHC 353 (7 February 2007)
The court held that section 31(2) of the Gauteng Provincial Liquor Act 2 of 2003 is clear and unambiguous: a catering or occasional permit may only be granted for a period not longer than seven consecutive days under a single application. The Act distinguishes between licences and permits, and does not provide for the granting of multiple seven-day periods under one application. The previous liquor legislation is not relevant to the interpretation of the current Act, which introduces a new regime for permits. The applicants' reliance on the Domitz case was misplaced, as that order did not decide the interpretive issue. The applicants' attempt to avoid multiple application fees by seeking...
- Citation
- [2007] ZAGPHC 353
- Parties
- Applicant: Simply Fish Moreleta Park CC; Applicant: Café Grenadine - The Village; Applicant: Wekker Restaurant CC; Applicant: Wonderjohn Restaurant CC; Respondent: Tshwane Local Committee of the Gauteng Liquor Board
- Court
- High Courts - Gauteng
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 7 February 2007
- Case Number
- 20158/2006
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / First Instance Judgment
- Outcome
- Applications dismissed with costs.
- Judges
- A. P. Ledwaba
- Legal Topics
- Statutory Interpretation, Liquor Licensing, Exceptional Circumstances, Permit Application, Costs Award
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Simply Fish Moreleta Park CC
Applicant
Café Grenadine - The Village
Applicant
Wekker Restaurant CC
Applicant
Wonderjohn Restaurant CC
Applicant
Tshwane Local Committee of the Gauteng Liquor Board
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / First Instance Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether section 31(2) of the Gauteng Provincial Liquor Act 2 of 2003 permits the granting of catering or occasional permits for multiple periods of seven consecutive days under a single application.
- 2 Whether the applicants' interpretation of section 31(2) is correct in light of the statutory context and previous legislation.
- 3 Whether the principle of stare decisis requires the respondent to follow the decision in the Domitz case.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that section 31(2) of the Gauteng Provincial Liquor Act 2 of 2003 is clear and unambiguous: a catering or occasional permit may only be granted for a period not longer than seven consecutive days under a single application. The Act distinguishes between licences and permits, and does not provide for the granting of multiple seven-day periods under one application. The previous liquor legislation is not relevant to the interpretation of the current Act, which introduces a new regime for permits. The applicants' reliance on the Domitz case was misplaced, as that order did not decide the interpretive issue. The applicants' attempt to avoid multiple application fees by seeking...
Court Disposition
Applications dismissed with costs.
Orders
- The applications are dismissed with costs.
- The applicant in case number 20158/06 is ordered to pay the respondent's costs, including costs of two counsel.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment