Tieber v Commissioner for Customs & Excise (622/90) [1992] ZASCA 183; 1992 (4) SA 844 (AD); (28 September 1992)

Tieber v Commissioner for Customs & Excise (622/90) [1992] ZASCA 183; 1992 (4) SA 844 (AD); (28 September 1992)

The court held that the gold was not imported into the Republic as it was in transit to Switzerland, and therefore not subject to seizure under the Customs and Excise Act. The appellant had locus standi as the person from whom the goods were effectively seized, and the requirements of section 89 were satisfied. Section 15(1) did not apply to goods in transit, and no declaration was required. The respondent was not entitled to seize the gold on the basis of importation or failure to declare. The order of the court a quo was set aside, and the gold was ordered to be returned to the appellant in a manner that would not result in contravention of the Mining Rights Act.

Citation
[1992] ZASCA 183
Parties
Appellant: Frans Ferdinand Tieber; Respondent: Commissioner for Customs & Excise
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 September 1992
Case Number
622/90
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Transvaal Provincial Division
Outcome
Appeal upheld with costs, including costs of two counsel. The order of the court a quo is set aside and replaced with an order for the return of the gold to the appellant or his agent, in a manner that avoids contravention of the Mining Rights Act.
Judges
Corbett, E M Grosskopf, Kumleben, Goldstone, Howie
Legal Topics
Customs and Excise Act, Forfeiture of Goods, Locus Standi, Goods in Transit, Declaration of Goods
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Customs and Excise Act Forfeiture of Goods Locus Standi Goods in Transit Declaration of Goods

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Frans Ferdinand Tieber

Appellant

Commissioner for Customs & Excise

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Transvaal Provincial Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant had locus standi to claim the return of the seized gold.
  2. 2 Whether the unwrought gold was imported into the Republic within the meaning of the Customs and Excise Act.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant was obliged to declare the gold under section 15(1) of the Act when leaving the transit area.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the gold was not imported into the Republic as it was in transit to Switzerland, and therefore not subject to seizure under the Customs and Excise Act. The appellant had locus standi as the person from whom the goods were effectively seized, and the requirements of section 89 were satisfied. Section 15(1) did not apply to goods in transit, and no declaration was required. The respondent was not entitled to seize the gold on the basis of importation or failure to declare. The order of the court a quo was set aside, and the gold was ordered to be returned to the appellant in a manner that would not result in contravention of the Mining Rights Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld with costs, including costs of two counsel. The order of the court a quo is set aside and replaced with an order for the return of the gold to the appellant or his agent, in a manner that avoids contravention of the Mining Rights Act.

Orders

  • The goods, being six packages marked 1 to 6, sealed with police seal number 1385 and containing unwrought gold with a total mass of 38,115 kilograms, are to be returned by the respondent to the appellant or his duly authorised agent by placing them as passenger baggage bound for Zurich, Switzerland, on an aircraft...
  • The respondent must hand the appellant or his agent the baggage receipts.