South Africa Case Law

Citibank, N.A. South African Branch and Another v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (2022/043103)

Citibank, N.A. South African Branch and Another v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (2022/043103) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1209; 2024 (1) SA 429 (GP); 87 SATC 321 (20 September 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2022/043103

Judge

Mooki

The High Court dismissed a VAT declaratory application about seconded employees, holding the applicants failed to show they were the employees’ employers for tax purposes.

• Value Added Tax Act
• Imported Services
• Employment Relationship For Tax
• Declaratory Relief
• Remuneration Definition
• Value-added-tax

Chimphondah v Housing Investment Partners (Pty) Ltd and Others (JR1195/19)

Chimphondah v Housing Investment Partners (Pty) Ltd and Others (JR1195/19) [2021] ZALCJHB 83; (2021) 42 ILJ 1720 (LC) (31 May 2021)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR1195/19

Judge

Nkutha-Nkontwana

The Court held that the applicant's claim for unpaid performance incentive bonus does not constitute remuneration as defined in the BCEA, but rather a discretionary benefit payable over and above guaranteed salary. Therefore, section 74(2) of the BCEA does not apply, and the CCMA lacked jurisdiction to determine the contractual claim. The applicant's recourse lies under section 77(3) of the BCEA in the Labour Court. Regarding constructive dismissal, the Court found that the applicant failed to prove intolerability caused by the employer, as required by section 186(1)(e) of the LRA. The applic…

Source excerpt

• Ccma Jurisdiction
• Remuneration Definition
• Constructive Dismissal
• Contractual Claims
• Basic Conditions Of Employment Act
• Arbitration Review

Mokoena and Others v MEC Gauteng Department of Health (J352/16)

Mokoena and Others v MEC Gauteng Department of Health (J352/16) [2016] ZALCJHB 98; (2016) 37 ILJ 1445 (LC) (18 March 2016)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J352/16

Judge

P Benjamin

The Labour Court held that Gauteng community health workers were employees under the LRA, but the court declined to rule on unfair dismissal issues.

• Employee Status
• Fixed Term Contracts
• Jurisdiction Of Labour Court
• Remuneration Definition
• Unfair Dismissal
• Public Sector Employment

Anglo Platinum Management Services v SARS (20725/2014)

Anglo Platinum Management Services v SARS (20725/2014) [2015] ZASCA 180; 2016 (3) SA 406 (SCA); 78 SATC 73 (30 November 2015)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

20725/2014

Judges

Cachalia, Leach, Tshiqi, Pillay, Mbha

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that Anglo Platinum’s salary sacrifice scheme was valid and that the vehicle use benefit was taxable under the fringe benefit rules.

• Salary Sacrifice
• Taxable Benefit
• Income Tax Act
• Remuneration Definition
• Salary-sacrifice
• Fringe-benefit-tax

ABC Limited v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services (12984)

ABC Limited v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services (12984) [2014] ZATC 8 (5 September 2014)

Court

Tax Court

Case number

12984

Judges

Mavundla, I Nkama, S Makda

The Tax Court held that amounts allocated to a company car scheme were taxable remuneration. The appeal against employees’ tax, interest, and penalties was dismissed.

• Employees Tax
• Salary Sacrifice
• Remuneration Definition
• Penalties And Interest
• Company Car Scheme
• Employees-tax

LSRC & Associates v Blom (J1907/2010)

LSRC & Associates v Blom (J1907/2010) [2011] ZALCJHB 39; (2011) 32 ILJ 2685 (LC) (11 April 2011)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J1907/2010

Judge

Rabkin-Naicker

The court found that the settlement agreement, made an arbitration award by the CCMA, is enforceable as if it were an order of the Labour Court. The applicant did not challenge the validity of the award and thus its terms are binding. The Labour Court cannot determine the parties' tax obligations arising from the settlement agreement, as such matters fall under the jurisdiction of SARS and are regulated by the Income Tax Act. The statutory obligation to deduct tax from remuneration cannot be overridden by the terms of a settlement agreement. The distinction between employee and independent co…

Source excerpt

• Settlement Agreement Enforcement
• Ccma Award
• Employee Vs Independent Contractor
• Income Tax Liability
• Remuneration Definition

Solidarity obo Bouwer v Arivia (Pty) Ltd T/a Arivia.Kom and Others (JR 2649/09)

Solidarity obo Bouwer v Arivia (Pty) Ltd T/a Arivia.Kom and Others (JR 2649/09) [2010] ZALC 62; [2010] 9 BLLR 981 (LC) ; (2010) 31 ILJ 2730 (LC) (23 April 2010)

Court

Labour Court

Case number

JR 2649/09

Judge

Francis

The Labour Court held that unfair-dismissal compensation must be calculated on gross remuneration, not net pay, and reviewed the award accordingly.

• Unfair Dismissal
• Compensation Calculation
• Remuneration Definition
• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Unfair-dismissal
• Labour-court-review

Vacation Exchanges International (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services (A253/2008)

Vacation Exchanges International (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services (A253/2008) [2009] ZAWCHC 139; 71 SATC 249 (7 August 2009)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A253/2008

Judges

Davis, Bozalek, Alllie

The court held that the Seventh Schedule’s valuation process for fringe benefits must be followed before employees’ tax can be assessed against the employer.

• Fringe Benefits Taxation
• Seventh Schedule Interpretation
• Employees Tax
• Remuneration Definition
• Fringe-benefits-taxation
• Employees-tax

TC Case No 11564 : Whether a person is an independent contractor and whether a close corporation was a personal service company - Fourth Schedule to the Income Tax Act (11564)

TC Case No 11564 : Whether a person is an independent contractor and whether a close corporation was a personal service company - Fourth Schedule to the Income Tax Act (11564) [2005] ZATC 11; 67 SATC 303 (29 June 2005)

Court

Tax Court

Case number

11564

Judges

B.R. Southwood, W.H. Gravett, R.J. Heffer

The Tax Court held that the appellant was not an independent contractor, that her close corporation was a personal service company, and that a section 76 penalty was justified.

• Independent Contractor Status
• Personal Service Company
• Remuneration Definition
• Income Tax Assessment
• Penalties Section 76
• Independent-contractor-status

Edbel Vyk (Pty) Ltd v South African Revenue Service (11244)

Edbel Vyk (Pty) Ltd v South African Revenue Service (11244) [2005] ZAFSHC 21 (27 January 2005)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

11244

Judges

Rampai, A J Koch, G de Waal

The court held that marketing agents for a micro-lender were independent contractors, so employees’ tax was not payable and the assessment had to be withdrawn.

• Independent Contractor Classification
• Employees Tax
• Remuneration Definition
• Fourth Schedule Income Tax Act
• Onus Of Proof
• Penalty And Interest