South Africa Case Law

S v Delport and Others (80/2017)

S v Delport and Others (80/2017) [2019] ZAFSHC 243; 2020 (2) SACR 179 (FB) (10 December 2019)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

80/2017

Judge

Murray AJ

The court found both Norman and Marius Delport guilty of extensive VAT fraud and related offences, involving R60 million defrauded from SARS over a period exceeding six years. Norman Delport's involvement was characterized by recklessness and negligence rather than direct intent, and his advanced age, poor health, lack of prior convictions, and sincere remorse were mitigating factors. The court determined that correctional supervision would be inappropriate given the seriousness of the offence and instead imposed a wholly suspended sentence of imprisonment. Marius Delport, as the principal pe…

Source excerpt

• Vat Fraud
• Contravention Of Vat Act
• Contravention Of Tax Administration Act
• Money Laundering
• Minimum Sentencing
• Asset Forfeiture

Director of Public Prosecutions, Western Cape v Schoeman and Another (904/2017)

Director of Public Prosecutions, Western Cape v Schoeman and Another (904/2017) [2019] ZASCA 158; 2020 (1) SACR 449 (SCA) (28 November 2019)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

904/2017

Judges

Cachalia, Plasket, Nicholls, Dlodlo, Tsoka

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the State failed to properly reserve questions of law under s 319 of the Criminal Procedure Act because it did not set out the factual basis upon which the points of law hinged. The alleged errors by the trial court in evaluating circumstantial evidence and applying dolus eventualis were found to be factual, not legal, in nature. The court reaffirmed that s 319 restricts appeals to questions of law and does not permit appeals on factual findings, even if the State is dissatisfied with the inferences drawn by the trial court. The court distinguished the Pi…

Source excerpt

• Reservation Of Questions Of Law
• Circumstantial Evidence
• Dolus Eventualis
• Prevention Of Organised Crime Act
• Vat Fraud
• Acquittal Review

Schell v Rall (A545/2016)

Schell v Rall (A545/2016) [2017] ZAGPPHC 1177 (26 October 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A545/2016

Judges

D S Molefe, C Collis

The High Court upheld most conviction and sentence appeals, finding flaws in the fraud and theft findings and substituting suspended sentences on the remaining VAT counts.

• Fraud
• Theft
• Vat Fraud
• Intention To Steal
• Misrepresentation
• Sentencing Principles

Mohan v Director of Public Prosecutions KwaZulu-Natal (3626/2016)

Mohan v Director of Public Prosecutions KwaZulu-Natal (3626/2016) [2017] ZAKZDHC 5; 2017 (2) SACR 76 (KZD) (7 February 2017)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

3626/2016

Judge

M R Chetty

The court dismissed an application to stay three criminal prosecutions, finding material non-disclosure, no proved trial prejudice, and no basis to interfere with prosecutorial discretion.

• Stay Of Prosecution
• Fair Trial Rights
• Vat Fraud
• Non Disclosure
• Separation Of Powers
• Interdict Requirements

S v Van Der Linde (12331/12)

S v Van Der Linde (12331/12) [2016] ZAGPJHC 179; [2016] 3 All SA 898 (GJ); 2016 (2) SACR 377 (GJ) (27 May 2016)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

12331/12

Judge

Nicholls

High Court criminal judgment on a fraudulent VAT refund scheme. The accused was convicted of fraud, forgery and uttering, but acquitted on POCA money-laundering counts.

• Vat Fraud
• Forgery
• Uttering
• Money Laundering
• Prevention Of Organised Crime Act
• Accomplice Evidence

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Badenhorst t/a SA Global Trading and/or Global Trading and Others, Commissioner of the South African Revenue Service v Vermaak and Others (51232/2013, 56971/2013)

Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service v Badenhorst t/a SA Global Trading and/or Global Trading and Others, Commissioner of the South African Revenue Service v Vermaak and Others (51232/2013, 56971/2013) [2015] ZAGPPHC 1085 (13 October 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

51232/2013, 56971/2013

Judge

C Pretorius

The court found that section 163 of the Tax Administration Act is clear and unambiguous in permitting preservation orders against 'any person' holding assets derived from tax fraud, not only taxpayers. SARS established a prima facie case that Mr Sassin and Trojin Feeds knowingly participated in a VAT fraud scheme, received R65 million from dissipated VAT repayments, and that preservation of their assets is necessary to secure collection of tax owed by Mr Badenhorst, who is insolvent. The court rejected the respondents' constitutional challenge, holding that the deprivation of property was not…

Source excerpt

• Tax Preservation Order
• Vat Fraud
• Section 163 Tax Administration Act
• Constitutional Property Rights
• Prima Facie Evidence

Grundling v The State (20616/2014)

Grundling v The State (20616/2014) [2015] ZASCA 129 (28 September 2015)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

20616/2014

Judges

Cachalia, Majiedt, Pillay

The Supreme Court of Appeal reduced a VAT-fraud sentence, finding the lower courts gave insufficient weight to rehabilitation material and mitigation.

• Vat Fraud
• Sentencing Principles
• Correctional Supervision
• Mitigating Factors
• Sentencing-principles
• Vat-fraud

Director of Public Prosecutions South Gauteng v Van Der Linde (A401/11)

Director of Public Prosecutions South Gauteng v Van Der Linde (A401/11) [2013] ZAGPJHC 328 (12 December 2013)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A401/11

Judges

B H Mbha, L Mdalana

The court found that the learned magistrate failed to properly apply the test under section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act by disregarding substantial unchallenged evidence implicating the respondent in a large-scale VAT fraud scheme. The rejection of documentary evidence solely because they were copies was a misdirection, as statutory provisions and case law permit the use of duplicates where originals are unavailable and authenticity is established. The court held that section 310 does not violate the constitutional protection against double jeopardy, as the respondent had not testified…

Source excerpt

• Section 174 Discharge
• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Double Jeopardy
• Vat Fraud
• Documentary Evidence
• Constitutional Rights

National Director of Public Prosecutions v van Staden and Others (730/2011)

National Director of Public Prosecutions v van Staden and Others (730/2011) [2012] ZASCA 171; 2013 (1) SACR 531 (SCA) (28 November 2012)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

730/2011

Judges

Lewis, Malan, Wallis, Pillay, Mbha

The Supreme Court of Appeal confirmed a provisional restraint order under POCA, holding that the NDPP had acted in good faith and disclosed material information.

• Prevention Of Organised Crime Act
• Restraint Order
• Confiscation Order
• Ex Parte Application
• Good Faith
• Vat Fraud

Van der Merwe and Others v Additional Magistrate, Cape Town and Others (5880/2008 (A))

Van der Merwe and Others v Additional Magistrate, Cape Town and Others (5880/2008 (A)) [2008] ZAWCHC 122; 2010 (1) SACR 470 (C) (24 December 2008)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

5880/2008 (A)

Judges

D M Davis, V Saldanha

The court held that the search warrants issued for Zonnekus, Helibase, and Royal Ascot were invalid and set aside because they failed to specify the suspected offences under investigation and did not comply with the principle of intelligibility required by law and the Constitution. The warrants were excessively broad, lacked specificity, and did not provide sufficient information to both the searcher and the searched regarding the ambit of the search. The magistrates failed to apply their minds properly when authorising these warrants, as evidenced by the absence of reasons and the lack of de…

Source excerpt

• Search And Seizure
• Criminal Procedure Act
• Intelligibility Of Warrants
• Income Tax Fraud
• Vat Fraud