Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Constitutional Law [2023] ZACC 39

Casino Association of South Africa and Others v Member of the Executive Council for Economic Development Environment Conservation and Tourism and Others (CCT 322/22)

Casino Association of South Africa and Others v Member of the Executive Council for Economic Development Environment Conservation and Tourism and Others (CCT 322/22) [2023] ZACC 39; 2024 (5) BCLR 611 (CC) (29 November 2023)

Court
Constitutional Court
Case number
CCT 322/22
Judges
Zondo CJ, Kollapen J, Madlanga J, Majiedt J, Makgoka AJ, Potterill AJ, Rogers J, Theron J, Van Zyl AJ

The Constitutional Court confirmed that sections 84(1)(e), 87(1)(a), and 87(3) of the North West Gambling Act unlawfully delegated the power to impose provincial taxes to the Executive, contrary to section 228(1) of the Constitution. Applying the dominant purpose test, the Court found that the impugned amendment to regulation 73(1) was not a regulatory charge but a tax, as its primary purpose was to raise general revenue for the Province, not to regulate gambling conduct. There was no sufficient nexus between the levies and the regulatory scheme. The applicants did not delay in bringing their…

Source excerpt

  • Provincial Taxation
  • Delegation Of Legislative Power
  • Money Bill Procedure
  • Condictio Indebiti
  • Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
  • Separation Of Powers
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [2015] ZACC 17

South African Reserve Bank and Another v Shuttleworth and Another (CCT194/14, CCT199/14)

South African Reserve Bank and Another v Shuttleworth and Another (CCT194/14, CCT199/14) [2015] ZACC 17; 2015 (5) SA 146 (CC); 2015 (8) BCLR 959 (CC); 78 SATC 23 (18 June 2015)

Court
Constitutional Court
Case number
CCT194/14, CCT199/14
Judges
Mogoeng CJ, Moseneke DCJ, Cameron J, Froneman J, Jappie AJ, Khampepe J, Molemela AJ, Nkabinde J, Theron AJ, Tshiqi AJ

The Constitutional Court held that the exit charge imposed under regulation 10(1)(c) of the Exchange Control Regulations was a regulatory charge, not a tax. Its dominant purpose was to regulate and discourage the export of capital, not to raise revenue for the State. The charge was imposed on a discrete group—those externalising capital above R750,000—and was not collected through the ordinary tax machinery. The fact that it incidentally raised revenue did not alter its regulatory character. Therefore, the charge did not require compliance with the money Bill procedure under sections 75 and 7…

Source excerpt

  • Money Bill Procedure
  • Exchange Control Regulations
  • Delegation Of Legislative Power
  • Dominant Purpose Test
  • Judicial Review Of Executive Action
  • Bill Of Rights Limitation
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [2014] ZASCA 157

Shuttleworth v South African Reserve Bank and Others (864/2013)

Shuttleworth v South African Reserve Bank and Others (864/2013) [2014] ZASCA 157; 2015 (1) SA 586 (SCA); [2014] 4 All SA 693 (SCA); 77 SATC 145 (1 October 2014)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
864/2013
Judges
Navsa, Ponnan, Majiedt, Fourie, Mocumie

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the ten per cent exit levy imposed by the South African Reserve Bank on the export of assets upon emigration was unlawful. Regulation 10(1)(c) did not authorise the raising of revenue, and the procedure prescribed by section 9(4) of the Currency and Exchanges Act for revenue-raising regulations was not followed. The levy constituted a tax or revenue-raising mechanism, which under the Constitution must be authorised by a money bill passed by Parliament. The payment of the levy by the applicant was made under protest to secure the release of his blocked ass…

Source excerpt

  • Exchange Control Regulations
  • Levy As Tax
  • Money Bill Procedure
  • Condictio Indebiti
  • Judicial Review
  • Administrative Action
Read case analysis
Administrative Law [2008] ZASCA 86

Minister of Finance and Another v Paper Manufacturers Association of South Africa (567/07)

Minister of Finance and Another v Paper Manufacturers Association of South Africa (567/07) [2008] ZASCA 86; 2008 (6) SA 540 (SCA); [2008] 4 All SA 509 (SCA); 70 SATC 267 (2 September 2008)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
567/07
Judges
Harms, Streicher, Mthiyane, Maya, Mhlantla

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the High Court lacked jurisdiction to interdict the Minister from submitting a Bill to Parliament. The respondent failed to establish a clear right to the relief sought, as the Bill did not retrospectively validate the Minister's notice but only prevented the future lapsing of amendments. The legislative process should not be interrupted except in exceptional circumstances, which were not present in this case. The Constitution reserves the power to pronounce on the constitutionality of Bills to the Constitutional Court, and the respondent's concerns regar…

Source excerpt

  • Interdict
  • Jurisdiction Of High Court
  • Customs And Excise Act
  • Review Of Administrative Action
  • Money Bill Procedure
  • Separation Of Powers
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.