Post by Admiralty News

"The court drew a distinction between liability for customs duties and the separate decision to demand an amount in lieu of forfeiture under section 88(2) of the Act. While liability for duties may arise automatically if statutory requirements are met, the forfeiture provision grants SARS a discretionary power. The SCA found no evidence that SARS considered relevant factors, invited representations from QI, or independently assessed whether a forfeiture-related demand was appropriate. As a result, the forfeiture decision was also found to be procedurally irrational and unlawful." - Quintus van der Merwe, Taryn Hunkin https://lnkd.in/gJD_6i7B