Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
ABD Limited v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (14302) [2024] ZATC 2; 87 SATC 64 (14 February 2024)
The Tax Court held that ABD’s 1% royalty was arm’s length, relying on a Cyprus internal CUP, and set aside SARS’s increased assessments.
Klipdam Diamond Mining Company (PTY) Ltd and Another v Nathan Alec Datnow t/a Shawshank Mining (2673/2017) [2022] ZANCHC 85 (20 January 2022)
The court found that the oral agreement did not amount to a transfer or lease of mining rights, as the plaintiff merely obtained the right to mine on a portion of the property and did not become the owner of the diamonds mined. The evidence and pleadings, though not perfectly aligned, were fully canvassed and did not prejudice the defendants. The defendants failed to prove statutory illegality or that the agreement was invalid under the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act or the General Law Amendment Act. The objective facts supported the conclusion that the mining right remained…
Source excerpt
Quill Associates (Pty) Ltd v Randfontein Local Municipality and Another (36264/2013; 36265/2013) [2015] ZAGPPHC 639 (15 September 2015)
The High Court clarified its earlier copyright judgment, confirming that the royalty and licence fee awards covered both the pre-summons and post-summons periods.
Emilia De Sousa t/a Old Fashioned Fish and Chips v Louwrens and Others (12311/2009) [2010] ZAGPPHC 106 (3 September 2010)
High Court franchise dispute: the plaintiff failed to prove royalties and damages, while the defendants’ restitution counterclaim also failed; cancellation was confirmed.
BP Southern Africa (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for South African Revenue Services (60/06) [2007] ZASCA 7; 69 SATC 79; 2007 BIP 364 (SCA) (13 March 2007)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that BP Southern Africa’s annual trademark royalty payments were revenue expenditure deductible under section 11(a) of the Income Tax Act.
Commissioner For The South African Revenue Service v Delta Motor Corporation (Pty) Ltd. (279/2001) [2002] ZASCA 114; 65 SATC 165 (23 September 2002)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the EST charges paid by the respondent to Opel were not part of the price of the imported CKD kits for customs duty purposes. The evidence established that the EST charges, comprising engineering, styling, and tooling portions, were royalties paid for the right to assemble, sell, and service Opel vehicles, and not directly related to the imported kits. The contractual arrangements made the EST charges payable in respect of vehicles sold, not as a condition of sale of the imported kits. The 1998 amendment clarified, rather than altered, the existing positi…
Source excerpt
Explore more
