High Court: 2028-2026

The judgments delivered in any of the High Court Divisions on this page are arranged per year and then per date of delivery.

High Court judgments delivered in another year, can be accessed through the navigation pane above.

2026
Date of Delivery	Parties Involved	Applicable Legislation	Keywords/Summary
27 May 2026 New!	Shaun Williams NO and Another v eThekwini Municipality and Others (13624/2022P)	Close Corporations Act, 1984 Companies Act, 1973 Companies Act, 2008 Tax Administration Act, 2011	Whether the application for security of costs brought by the first defendant in respect of action proceedings brought by the first and second plaintiffs as joint liquidators of Zikhulise Cleaning Maintenance and Transport CC against the first defendant may be granted. While SARS is not a party to the proceedings, it is heavily invested in the matter.
29 April 2026	Poseidon Operations (Pty) Ltd v CSARS and Others (23278/2022)	Superior Courts Act, 2013	Whether the application for leave to appeal the judgment and order of the court of 26 May 2025 may be granted.
30 March 2026	CSARS and Another v Alliance Fuel (Pty) Ltd (Leave to Appeal) (7453/2024)	Customs and Excise Act, 1964 Superior Courts Act, 2013	The principal issues are as follows: Whether the order granted on 25 July 2024 is appealable, notwithstanding its interim form Whether the grounds based on section 96 of the Customs and Excise Act raise reasonable prospects of success Whether the applicants’ complaints based on audi a/teram partem and section 24 of the Superior Courts Act raise reasonable prospects of success Whether there are reasonable prospects that another court may differ on the applicability of rule 55(3)(e) and on the procedural route adopted by Alliance Fuel Whether another court may differ on the relief granted restraining further searches and the use of seized material Whether the costs order is reasonably arguable on appeal
27 May 2026	CSARS v Shabangu and Another (121282/2023) and CSARS v Shabangu NO and Others (121275/2023)	Insolvency Act, 1936 Tax Administration Act, 2011	Insolvency – sequestration – whether final sequestration orders should be granted in both the applications.
25 May 2026	Aviwe Ntandazo Ndyamara NO and Others v CSARS (51569/2020)	Value-Added Tax Act, 1991 Insolvency Act, 1936	Whether VAT payments made by Swifambo constituted “dispositions not made for value” and were therefore recoverable under section 26 of the Insolvency Act.
24 April 2026	Ocean Ark Shipping Ltd and Another v CSARS (2025/209746)	Customs and Excise Act, 1964	Whether the applicants demonstrated a prima facie right to relief – the proportionality of the Commissioner’s enforcement actions – the adequacy of a revised guarantee offered as security.
16 April 2026	X and Another v CSARS (A117/2025)	Tax Administration Act, 2011	Estimated assessment – objection – rule 7(2)(b)(iii) – validity of objection – burden of proof – section 102 – rule 52(2)(b) – Healthbridge system – substantiating documents – dispute resolution – access to courts.
25 March 2026	Trakman NO v CSARS (58927/21)	Customs and Excise Act, 1964	Whether Silver Lake was entitled to claim diesel refunds for periods prior to its registration as a diesel refund user, as stipulated under the Customs and Excise Act 91 of 1964.
13 March 2026	BASF South Africa Pty (Ltd) v CSARS (A2024/024644)	Income Tax Act, 1962	Whether the Tax Court was correct in granting SARS leave to amend its rule 31 statement and refusing BASF leave to amend its rule 32 statement – whether SARS’s proposed amendments constituted an impermissible novation of the legal and factual basis of the additional assessment on transfer pricing transaction issued under section 31(2) of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 (as it read in 2011).
5 March 2026	Democratic Alliance v Minister of Finance and Others (2025/045530)	Value-Added Tax Act, 1991	Constitutional Law – Section 7(4) of the VAT Act 89 of 1991 – impermissible delegation of legislative power to the Minister – Section 7(4) authorising the executive to determine rate of tax that applies across the economy – delegated power not accompanied by express statutory criteria governing the magnitude of the alteration, nor requiring parliament’s ratification within a defined short period after its exercise – No sufficiently defined statutory limits or mechanisms of prompt legislative control to ensure that the balance between executive agility and parliamentary supremacy is maintained – section 7(4) declared unconstitutional and invalid as it constitutes an impermissible delegation of legislative power to the executive. The following Frequently Asked Questions were compiled based on questions received by taxpayers after the judgment: Does the court ruling mean I don’t have to pay VAT anymore? No, VAT obligations are unchanged. The ruling by the Western Cape High Court relates to the narrow question of whether a VAT rate change announced by the Minister may take effect before a Parliamentary process. It must still be confirmed by the Constitutional Court to take effect and allows Parliament 24 months to amend the law. Is VAT now unconstitutional? No, the ruling by the Western Cape High Court relates to the narrow question of whether a VAT rate change announced by the Minister may take effect before a Parliamentary process. It must still be confirmed by the Constitutional Court to take effect and allows Parliament 24 months to amend the law. Can SARS still audit me for VAT now that the court ruled against it? Yes, the ruling is unrelated to audit. The ruling by the Western Cape High Court relates to the narrow question of whether a VAT rate change announced by the Minister may take effect before a Parliamentary process. It must still be confirmed by the Constitutional Court to take effect and allows Parliament 24 months to amend the law. I heard Parliament must fix the VAT law – does that mean VAT stops? No, VAT obligations are unchanged. The ruling by the Western Cape High Court relates to the narrow question of whether a VAT rate change announced by the Minister may take effect before a Parliamentary process. It must still be confirmed by the Constitutional Court to take effect and allows Parliament 24 months to amend the law. What happens after 24 months if Parliament doesn’t fix the VAT law? The ruling by the Western Cape High Court must still be confirmed by the Constitutional Court to take effect. If Parliament does not act within the 24 months, a VAT rate change announced by the Minister will take effect from a date approved by Parliament.
10 February 2026	WCF Hardware Distributors (Pty) Ltd v CSARS (2024/051127)	Customs and Excise Act, 1964	TAX – Customs and excise – Tariff – Underpaid duties and VAT – imported goods displayed characteristics of a completed product – interpretation of manufacture – items were not raw materials undergoing transformation – rebate contemplates production from raw materials and not minor additions to finished parts – assembly undertaken lacked transformative character required for manufacture – items were merely repackaged with screws – application dismissed – Customs and Excise Act 91 of 1964, section 47(9).
6 February 2026	Multipurpose Distributors v CSARS and Others (000317/2023)	Customs & Excise Act, 1964	Whether SARS was correct to issue the LOD amounting to R7 985 412.23 (comprising of duties, VAT, interest, penalties and forfeiture amount) – whether goods were diverted – whether the late application should be condoned.
2 February 2026	Afrinergy Holdings (Pty) Ltd v CCARS and Others (Review) (18187/2022)	Customs and Excise Act, 1964	TAX – Customs and excise – Seizure – Abandoned truck and trailer carrying fuel – driver absconded – suspicion of non-compliance with import declaration requirements – seizure based on material information gathered during investigation – failure to provide full documentation – ownership not proven – high risk nature of fuel imports – suspicion of contravention was objectively reasonable – seizure was lawful and rational – application dismissed – Customs and Excise Act 91 of 1964, sections 89 and 96.
2 February 2026	Ferreira v CSARS (2024/067035)	Tax Administration Act, 2011 Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, 2000	Section 164(3) of the Tax Administration Act 28 of 2011 (TAA) – Pay Now Argue Later – Section 9 reconsideration request – Section 6(2)(f) of Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 (PAJA) – whether SARS, acting under section 9 and section 164 of the TAA, and subject to review under section 6 of PAJA, acted lawfully and fairly when it refused to suspend the taxpayer’s obligation to pay the disputed tax debt despite the taxpayer offering substantial security through his TMM shareholding.
16 January 2026	Contract Packing Solutions CC v SARS and Others (2025/016340)	Customs and Excise Act, 1964	Whether the following may be granted: Applicant’s urgent application for relief against the first respondent for the undisturbed resumption of its business operations of manufacturing and canning the non-alcoholic energy drinks An order granting the reduction of the period stipulated in section 96(1)(a)(i) of the Customs and Excise Act, 1964 (“the Act”) in terms of section 96(1)(c)(iii) of the Act to enable the matter to be heard on an urgent basis

Table of Contents