Consumer Protection Act: National Consumer Commission: Notice of withdrawal of National Consumer Commission’s Enforcement Guidelines

Income Tax Act: Further information required for purposes of receipt

Accounting Standards Board: Exposure Draft 215 and Exposure Draft 216:Comments invited

MEDICAL

National Health Act: National Environmental Health norms and standards

National Health Act: Call for nominations: Members of the Board: Office of Health Standards Compliance: Comments invited

PUBLIC PROCUREMENT

Public Procurement Amendment Bill: Notice of Intention to Introduce Private Member’s Bill into Parliament: Comments invited

The importance of DFI funding to support sustainable agriculture: A banking perspective

DA targets end to BBBEE and race-based tenders

BEE here to stay – Ramaphosa

FSCA fines Harith General Partners R1.7 million for Fica non-compliance

Warning to retailers that charge customers extra when paying with bank card

Optimism that SA is on cusp of exiting greylisting

Cyril Ramaphosa admits Expropriation Act is unconstitutional

A landmark shift in rights, compliance and inclusion with Kenya’s new Persons with Disabilities Act

Scam Alert: How fraudsters can exploit new Aarto system to send ‘ghost fines’

AGRICULTURAL

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Plant Breeders’ Rights Act:

Receipts of applications for Plant Breeders’ Rights

G 53515 GoN 6736

17 October 2025

DETAILS

Should you wish to view the full list of applications, please click on the link provided below.

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Plant Breeders’ Rights Act: Receipts of applications for Plant Breeders’ Rights

G 53515 GoN 6736

17 October 2025

53515gon6736.pdf

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Agricultural Product Standards Act:

Proposed inspection fees for 2026: Comments invited

G 53515 GoN 6742

– Comment by 17 Nov 2025

17 October 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1. Meat and Protein Producers

• Companies producing or processing meat products will be impacted by protein content sampling fees (e.g., R533.18 per sample for 2026).

2. Food Manufacturers Using Soya

• Manufacturers that include soy in their products will face soya content sampling fees (R1,764.90 per sample).

3. Dairy and Calcium-Fortified Product Producers

• Businesses producing dairy or calcium-enriched foods will be affected by calcium determination fees (R1,764.90 per sample).

4. Genetic Testing and Quality Assurance Labs

• Labs or companies that require DNA-based species identification for compliance will incur costs (R1,272.62 per sample).

5. Packaged and Coated Food Producers

• Producers of packaged or coated products will pay for physical test sampling (R212.09 per sample).

6. Agricultural Exporters and Importers

• These organisations often need inspection services for compliance with local and international standards, so hourly inspection fees and kilometre rates will matter.

7. Food Safety and Quality Assurance Agencies

• Third-party inspection and certification bodies will also be affected since they rely on these official standards.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Agricultural Product Standards Act: Proposed inspection fees for 2026: Comments invited

G 53515 GoN 6742

– Comment by 17 Nov 2025

17 October 2025

53515gon6742.pdf

ACTION

Ensure that you submit your comments before 17 November 2025

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Agricultural Product Standards Act:

Standards and Requirements: Control of Export of Oilseeds: Amendment

G 53574 GoN 6757

24 October 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1. Agricultural Exporters

• Companies involved in the production and export of oilseeds (e.g., sunflower, soybean, canola) will need to comply with the updated standards.
• This includes ensuring that their products meet the new quality, packaging, and documentation requirements.

2. Oilseed Producers and Farmers

• Farmers growing oilseed crops may be indirectly affected, especially if their produce is destined for export markets.
• They may need to adjust farming practices to meet new quality standards.

3. Agricultural Cooperatives and Associations

• These groups often support farmers and exporters with compliance, logistics, and advocacy.
• They will need to update their guidance and training materials to reflect the new standards.

4. Quality Assurance and Inspection Bodies

• Organizations responsible for inspecting and certifying agricultural exports will need to align their procedures with the amended standards.

5. Logistics and Export Companies

• Firms handling the transport and export documentation of oilseeds must ensure that shipments meet the revised requirements to avoid delays or rejections at borders.

6. Government Departments and Regulatory Agencies

• Particularly the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development, which oversees enforcement and compliance.
• Customs and border control agencies may also need to update their protocols.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Agricultural Product Standards Act: Standards and Requirements: Control of Export of Oilseeds: Amendment

G 53574 GoN 6757

24 October 2025

53574gon6757.pdf

ACTION

1. Compliance with New Export Standards

Organizations involved in oilseed exports must:

• Review and understand the amended standards.
• Ensure their products meet the updated quality, grading, and packaging requirements.
• Adjust operational procedures to align with the new rules.

2. Operational Adjustments

• Exporters may need to revise their quality control processes.
• Farmers and cooperatives might need to change cultivation or post-harvest handling practices.
• Inspection bodies must update their evaluation criteria.

3. Documentation and Certification

• Export documentation must reflect the new standards.
• Certification processes may change, requiring updated forms or procedures.

4. Timeline for Implementation

• The amended standards come into effect 7 days after publication, i.e., on 31 October 2025.
• Organizations have a short window to prepare and comply.

5. Access to the Amended Standards

• The full details are available:
  • At the office of the Executive Officer in Pretoria.
  • By request via email or phone.
  • On the Department’s website: www.nda.gov.za

CONSTRUCTION

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Architectural Profession Act:

Conditions relating to Continuing Professional Development and Renewal of Registration

G 53515 BN 839

17 October 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1.     Architectural Learning Sites (ALS)

o   Educational institutions accredited by SACAP to offer architectural programs.

o   Must ensure mentoring, CPD alignment, and reporting for student development.

2.     Voluntary Associations (VA)

o   Recognized professional bodies, institutes, or societies in the built environment.

o   Responsible for validating CPD activities, issuing certificates, and ensuring alignment with SACAP competencies.

3.     CPD Providers

o   Entities offering Category 1 CPD activities (e.g., workshops, seminars).

o   Must be accredited and follow strict guidelines for content, certification, and relevance.

4.     Employers of Architects

o   Architectural firms and companies organizing in-house training or mentoring.

o   Must ensure proper documentation and alignment with CPD requirements.

5.     Built Environment Organizations

o   Entities involved in adjudicating architecture awards or hosting professional events.

o   Their activities may contribute to CPD points if recognized by SACAP.

SUMMED UP

Purpose

To outline the conditions for Continuing Professional Development (CPD) and renewal of registration for professionals registered under the Architectural Profession Act (Act No. 44 of 2000).

Who Is Affected

1.     Registered Professionals under Section 18(1)(a) and (c)

2.     Architectural Learning Sites (ALS) – accredited educational institutions

3.     Voluntary Associations (VA) – SACAP-recognized professional bodies

4.     CPD Providers – entities offering approved CPD activities

5.     Professionals practicing abroad

6.     Apprentices and Candidates – registered under Section 18(1)(b) (exempt from CPD)

7.     Mentors, lecturers, adjudicators, and committee members

CPD Requirements

• Minimum 25 CPD points over a 5-year cycle
• At least 5 points must be from Category 1: Developmental Activities
• Minimum 3 points per year, with 1 point annually from Category 1

Categories of CPD Activities

1.     Category 1: Developmental

o   Workshops, seminars, lectures, mentoring, adjudication

2.     Category 2: Work-Based

o   Architectural work, lecturing, in-house training

3.     Category 3: Individual

o   Memberships, postgraduate studies, publications, presentations

Renewal & Compliance

• Renewal notices sent in the 5th year (July–Sept)

• Non-compliance may lead to:
  • Extension requests
  • Fines (up to R20,000)
  • Deregistration and penalty CPD points upon re-registration

Exemptions

• Unemployed, ill, retired, or non-practicing professionals
• Must apply with motivation for exemption

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

BOARD NOTICE 839 OF 2025

Conditions relating to Continuing Professional Development and Renewal of Registration

In terms of section 36 of the Architectural Profession Act, 2000 (Act No. 44 of 2000) (“the Act”), the South African Council for the Architectural Profession hereby makes known that it has, in compliance with section 13(k) of the Act and after consultation with the recognised voluntary associations and registered persons, determined the conditions relating to, and the nature and extent of, continuing education and training as set out hereunder.

These conditions relating to the nature and extent of continuing education and training shall come into operation on the date of publication of the final Board Notice in the Government Gazette.

1. Definitions

In this Board Notice, if reference is made to the male gender, it includes the female gender; a word or expression to which a meaning has been assigned by the Act has the same meaning unless the context otherwise indicates.

“Architectural Learning Sites (ALS)” means an educational institution that offers architectural programs and that has been granted accreditation by the Council in terms of Section 13(b) of the Act;

“Approved CPD provider” means an entity that has been accredited by the Council to offer appropriate learning in respect of category 1 CPD activities as contemplated in clause 4.2.1 and Appendix A;

“Continuing professional development (CPD)” means continuing education and training as contemplated in Section 13(k) of the Act, and also means the systematic maintenance, improvement, and broadening of knowledge and skills and the development of personal qualities necessary for the execution of professional and technical duties throughout a person’s architectural career;

“Expiry date” as contemplated in Section 22(1) of the Act, means the 31st of December of every year;

“interactive” means, in the context of development activities, full active participation in the activities such as organisation, presentation, and active discussion.

“Registered Professional” means a person who is registered in terms of section 19(2)(a) of the Act;

“The Act” means the Architectural Profession Act 44 of 2000.

“The Council” means the Council established in terms of Section 2 of the Act, and the context of these conditions means any committee, person, or persons duly authorized by the Council to perform specified functions in terms of these conditions;

“Voluntary Association” (VA) means an association, institute, or society which is recognised by the Council as a voluntary association in terms of Section 25(3) of the Act.

“The CPD cycle” means a period of up to five years from the date of professional registration.

2. Registered Persons required to undertake CPD

All registered persons who are registered in a professional registration category listed under Section 18(1)(a) and (c) of the Act must undertake continuing education and training.

3. CPD requirements for Registered Professionals who are practicing abroad

a) Where a system of CPD is being applied in any particular country, such requirements may be accepted by the Council, provided that documentary proof of compliance with such CPD requirements is submitted. This may be in the form of a certification by the relevant accrediting authority in the country concerned.

b) The points earned as set out above will be converted to be in line with the allocation of points applicable in South Africa (i.e., 10 hours = One Point in Category 1).

c) If no CPD is undertaken by the Registered Professional practicing abroad in terms of the above, such registered professional must, upon return to South Africa, apply for the necessary extension of time for compliance, to provide him sufficient time to obtain and claim the required CPD points for the renewal of registration.

d) Any Registered Professional practicing abroad may register for CPD courses in South Africa via e-learning.

e) Registered Professionals practicing abroad have the option to cancel their registration and re-register upon their return to South Africa.

4. Exemption from CPD requirements

a) Any person whose registration was cancelled, and who no longer carries out any architectural work either in a consulting capacity, lecturing at an educational institution, or in a salaried position, is exempted from these conditions.

b) If any Registered Professional referred to in clause (a) above elects to return to active architectural practice, such a person must apply to the Council for re-registration to the active register and will have to start attending CPD activities whilst practicing.

c) The CPD Committee may, upon receipt of a fully motivated and substantiated application from any Registered Professional, recommend to Council to grant full or partial exemption from the requirements of these conditions for such period as the Council may deem appropriate and reasonable.

d) Each application for full or partial exemption shall be considered on its own merits.

e) The fully motivated and substantiated application as per clause (c) above may include: Registered Professionals who are unemployed, on long-term sick leave/terminally ill, or may currently be non-practising for other compassionate reasons, and/or family responsibility leave.

f) Any person who is registered as an apprentice or in a candidate category contemplated in Section 18 (1) (b) is exempted from these conditions.

5. General CPD requirements

a) During each five-year cycle, every Registered Professional must obtain a minimum of 25 CPD points to qualify for renewal of their registration in terms of section 22 (1) of the Act.

b) A minimum of (5) five of the total number of points required must be obtained and claimed in Category 1 – Developmental Activities.

c) In addition to the requirements set out above, a Registered Professional must obtain at least three points per annum, of which at least one point must be obtained in Category 1.

6. Recording of CPD Activities

a) Unless exempted in terms of the conditions as described in Paragraph 4 above, all Registered Professionals must record their CPD activities electronically, on their private, password protected online profile that can be accessed from SACAP’s website.

b) Registered Professionals must claim CPD points continuously as they occur during each year.

c) Certificates of attendance of Category 1 activities must indicate the actual SACAP competence or specific products a registered professional was trained on, and must be uploaded with the claim for the points on the online portal.

d) A certificate of attendance that does not indicate the SACAP competence or products a registered professional was trained on will not be accepted for purposes of continuing professional development and training.

e) Proof of any points obtained, such as a certificate of attendance of Category 1 activities, must be uploaded online to enable SACAP to evaluate the points and approve or refer back for remediation.

f) Registered Professionals who are at the end of their renewal cycle must claim all CPD points for the period before the end of December of the fifth year (i.e., if the date for renewal is 2017, claims must be submitted by 31 December 2016).

g) All documentary evidence of CPD points claimed must be retained for five years for auditing purposes.

7. Auditing of CPD records activities

a) The Council may conduct random audits as it deems necessary and practicable of the CPD records of any registered professional who is required to undertake CPD in terms of these rules.

b) The Council must advise the Registered Professional within 30 days after completion of an audit of the outcome of such audit.

c) If, during such an audit, the Registered Professional is assessed as not having met the requirements, his CPD record and verification documentation must be referred to the CPD Committee or the delegated Committee of the Council for a decision regarding remedial steps to be taken by the Registered Professional. Such persons will automatically be earmarked for a re-audit during the next year.

8. Renewal of registration and Assessment against the requirements

a) The Council shall notify the Registered Professional during the third term (July – September of the fifth year of the cycle) regarding the renewal of their registration.

b) Electronic renewal notices shall be sent by SACAP to all Registered Professionals, confirming the requirements for the renewal of registration.

c) The Council may call for such documentary evidence from the Registered Professional as it may deem necessary to approve the points claimed.

d) If the Council is satisfied that the Registered Professional has met the requirements of these conditions, the Council must indicate such decision in the applicable register maintained by the Council and, within 30 days of making the decision, inform the Registered Professional of such decision and of the fact that his registration will, subject to these rules, be valid for the next five-year CPD cycle.

e) If the Registered Professional has failed to comply with the requirements of these rules, the relevant provisions about non-compliance contained in paragraph 9 below will apply. Such a Registered Professional must be informed of the decision as well as of the implications within 30 days from the date on which the decision was made.

f) In addition to the notification to be sent to all Registered Professionals due for renewal of registration, a notification shall be sent to all Registered Professionals at the end of the fourth year of the CPD cycle, reminding them that they will be required to renew their registration at the end of the next year.

g) A reminder shall be sent to all Registered Professionals, on an annual basis, advising them to claim the required CPD points.

9. Non-compliance with these Conditions at the Renewal stage

a) If the Registered Professional has failed to comply with the requirements of these rules, the Council must, within 30 days, inform the non-compliant Registered Professional of this fact.

b) Such Registered Professional must apply for an Extension of the period of compliance. Such an extension will afford the Registered Professional until the end of the calendar year to ensure that they meet the requirements for renewal of registration.

c) An application for extension as contemplated in these rules shall not be considered without the necessary application and proof of payment of the administration fee having been submitted.

d) The Registered Professional will be required to obtain and claim the necessary points for the renewal of registration, as well as the minimum number of points required per annum, during the year that the extension is granted.

10. Failure to comply with these conditions

a) Any Registered Professional who fails to undertake CPD activities or to comply with these rules shall be charged with improper conduct for failure to comply with Rule 2.4, and the provisions of Sections 27(3), 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33 of the Act apply mutatis mutandis in respect of such person.

b) A Registered Professional found guilty of failure to comply with Rule 2.4 by a duly constituted Disciplinary Tribunal shall be fined in terms of Section 32 (3) (ii) of the Act.

c) The fine is calculated in terms of the Adjustment of Fines Act, 1991 (Act No. 101 of 1991) by the ratio of one year’s imprisonment. The ratio for one-year imprisonment is (twenty thousand) R20,000. The ratio is based on section 92 of the Magistrate Court Act, 1944 (Act 32 of 1994), read with Government Notice R1411 (GG 19435) of October 1998.

11. Right to appeal

The provisions of Section 24(1) and 24 (3) of the Act apply mutatis mutandis in respect of a person who is aggrieved by a decision of the Council to refuse the renewal of the person’s registration.

12. Deregistration

a) If the Registered Professional’s registration is cancelled due to non-payment of his annual fee in terms of Section 20(1)(a)(iii), the Registered Professional must apply for reregistration and may not practice his profession until he has been re-registered.

b) Such Registered Professional must accrue and claim at least two penalty CPD points from Category 1, within 12 months of reregistration. These points are required in addition to the points normally required per annum. This implies that a Registered Professional who re-registers, after his/her registration has been cancelled due to non-payment, will be required to claim a total of 27 CPD points during the particular CPD cycle. A total of seven of these points must be claimed in Category 1.

c) If the Registered Professional failed to obtain two penalty CPD points from Category 1, within 12 months of reregistration, such Registered Professional must apply for the necessary extensions and obtain the required CPD points within the extension period.

d) In addition to the original registration date, a current registration date, being the date of reregistration, will be noted on the Registered Professional’s online profile. The 5 (five) year CPD cycle will be determined by the current registration date.

13. Approval of Providers of CPD Activities

a) Voluntary Associations and Accredited Architectural Learning Sites are approved to offer Category 1 CPD activities.

b) Voluntary Associations are approved to validate and monitor Category 1 CPD activities offered by providers who have not been approved in terms of these rules. This includes allocating appropriate points to such activities.

c) Voluntary Associations may charge an appropriate fee to recover costs reasonably incurred for validating such activity.

d) Whenever a Voluntary Association validates Category 1 CPD, it must ensure accessibility of the activity to registered professionals (Location), the costs, and the relevance of the activity.

e) It is mandatory that Voluntary Associations indicate the relevant SACAP Professional Competency and/or product or specific development on the CPD Certificates for the Category 1 CPD events.

f) SACAP shall no longer accept Category 1 CPD points if the provided CPD certificate does not indicate the SACAP Professional Competencies or the specific products and/or specific training provided for the purposes of continuing professional development.

g) The Council has the right to review any CPD Category 1 activities validated by Voluntary Associations and ensure that such CPD activities are relevant and contribute to the development and maintenance of professional competencies.

h) The Council shall not be prohibited from offering CPD activities to Registered Professionals.

14. Approval of CPD Activities

a) Subject to the definition of CPD as set out in this document, a voluntary association should, in approving a Category 1 CPD activity, take into consideration the following:

i. The activity should serve to maintain or enhance the knowledge, skills, and competence of all those who participate in it;

ii. The activity should meet an educational and developmental need and provide an effective learning experience for the participants.

iii. The depth and breadth of the subject matter covered must be appropriate;

iv. The subject covered should provide a balanced view and should not be unduly promotional.

v. Courses may be assessed by obtaining feedback from participants.

vi. CPD providers must have a testing mechanism to assess whether the activity contributed to the competence and skills of a Registered Professional and the extent to which the activity has met the educational and developmental needs of the Registered Professional.

vii. All Category 1 CPD Activities shall be validated in alignment with the following Professional Competencies, amongst others:

• Architectural Design

• Environmental relationships

• Construction Technology

• The structure of buildings

• Contextual and urban relationships

• Architectural history, theory, and precedent

• Building services and related technologies

• Contract documentation and administration

• Computer applications

• Office practice, legal aspects, and ethics

b) Any provider who desires validation of a Category 1 CPD activity must apply to a recognised voluntary association for approval of such activity.

c) Prior to the approval or validation of a CPD activity, the recognised voluntary association or accredited educational institution shall verify and keep records confirming that the trainer or facilitator possesses the requisite experience, knowledge, and/or qualifications relevant to the subject matter of the CPD activity.

d) Any registered professional who intends to undertake a CPD activity offered by a provider other than a recognised voluntary association or accredited educational institution should ascertain whether such activity is approved in terms of these rules.

e) An approved CPD activity is valid for such period as specified by the Council from time to time.

15. Annexures

a) Annexure A table reflects a summary of the calculation of the CPD points and the required points per annum, as well as over the five-year cycle.

b) Annexure ‘B’ reflects further information on the categories of activities and the requirements can be found in.

ANNEXURE A

This table reflects a summary of the calculation of the CPD points and the required points per annum, as well as over the five-year cycle.

Further information on the categories of activities and the requirements can be found in Annexure ‘B’.

Categories of CPD activities

1. Category 1: developmental activities

a) Points for this category can be claimed for the Attendance of structured educational/ developmental activities provided; such activities are validated by a recognised Voluntary Association or Accredited Learning Sites.

• Workshops

• Conferences

• Congresses

• Lectures

• Seminars

• Refresher Courses

• E-learning

• Awards adjudication

b) Attendance of any programmes by the accredited Schools of Architecture at the accredited Architectural Learning Sites (ALSs).

c) Mentoring architectural students at any of the ALSs will be acknowledged for a maximum of 3 points per annum.

d) The mentor will be required to spend at least four hours per week assisting and mentoring the students at the university.

e) The university has to complete a report on the mentoring that was done. This report will serve as confirmation of the CPD points claimed.

f) All mentors must be listed as such with SACAP.

g) Registered professionals who are appointed to participate in the adjudication of awards by recognised voluntary associations and/or other built environment entities or organisations shall be eligible to claim CPD points, provided that the appointment and participation are verifiable and properly documented.

2. Calculation of points

a) Save for the mentoring of architectural students, as set out above, 1 Point will be allocated for attendance of a 10-hour activity, depending on whether participation is interactive or noninteractive.

b) A full-day activity will be regarded as being for 10 hours, and a half-day activity will be considered as five hours and hence half a point.

c) The points to be claimed for attendance of Category 1 CPD activities will normally be determined by the VA or ALS accrediting the activity and will be indicated as such.

3. Number of points to be claimed

a) It is compulsory to claim at least one Point from Category 1 annually.

b) This implies that a minimum of five Points is required from this category at the end of the five-year cycle to renew the registered person’s registration.

c) It further implies that five points may be accrued and claimed in Category 1 within a calendar year and may therefore be claimed for the full five-year CPD cycle.

1. Category 2: Work-based activities (Architectural work)

a) Registered persons also improve their knowledge and competence by performing their day-today architectural responsibilities. Points can be claimed in this category for architectural-related work (including management) and Full-time lecturing at an accredited ALS.

2. Calculation of points

a) One point for 400 hours per year for architectural-related work and lecturing.

3. Number of points to be claimed

a) A maximum of two points (for 800 hours) may be claimed in respect of this activity per annum, and thus 10 points over the five-year cycle.

1. Mentoring

a) The points can be claimed for the mentoring of Apprentices and Candidates registered with SACAP; and/or

b) Architectural students as required as part of their validated programme.

c) In-house training sessions organised by an employer/architectural company and career guidance for apprentices and candidates may also be presented under this category.

2. Calculation of points

One point can be claimed for 50 hours of mentoring.

3. Number of points that can be claimed

A maximum of one CPD point can be claimed in this category per annum. This implies that no more than five points can be claimed for this activity over the five-year cycle.

1. Category 3: individual activities

a) Active membership of one or more voluntary associations recognised by SACAP. A point can be claimed in this category for being a member of a SACAP-recognised voluntary association.

2. Calculation of points

a) One point can be claimed for active membership of a full financial year of one of the SACA Precognised voluntary associations.

3. Number of points to be claimed

a) A maximum of one point can be claimed in this category per annum.

1. Individual activities

a) Except for post-graduate studies, points can be claimed under the individual categories listed in the table below.

2. Calculation of points

a) One point can be claimed for every 10 hours of participation in the listed activities.

3. Number of points to be claimed

a) The maximum number of points that can be claimed for these activities per annum, and during the five-year cycle, is indicated in the table below.

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Architectural Profession Act: Conditions relating to Continuing Professional Development and Renewal of Registration

G 53515 BN 839

17 October 2025

53515bn839.pdf

ACTION

Architectural Learning Sites (ALS)

Compliance Actions:

• Must be accredited by SACAP under Section 13(b) of the Act.
• Offer structured educational programs aligned with SACAP competencies.
• Submit reports verifying mentoring activities for CPD point claims.
• Ensure lecturers and mentors are listed with SACAP.

Voluntary Associations (VA)

Compliance Actions:

• Validate and monitor Category 1 CPD activities.
• Allocate CPD points and issue certificates indicating SACAP competencies.
• Ensure accessibility, relevance, and affordability of CPD activities.
• Maintain records of trainers’ qualifications and experience.
• Submit validated CPD activities for SACAP review.
• Charge reasonable fees for validation services.

CPD Providers

Compliance Actions:

• Must be accredited by SACAP or validated by a VA.
• Ensure CPD activities meet educational and developmental standards.
• Include SACAP competencies or product-specific training on certificates.
• Maintain testing mechanisms to assess learning outcomes.
• Submit activities for approval and adhere to SACAP’s validation period.

Employers of Architects

Compliance Actions:

• Organize in-house training or mentoring aligned with CPD requirements.
• Track and verify mentoring hours (e.g., 50 hours = 1 CPD point).
• Support staff in recording CPD activities on SACAP’s online portal.

Built Environment Organizations

Compliance Actions:

• Ensure adjudication activities (e.g., architecture awards) are recognized and documented.
• Collaborate with VAs or SACAP to validate CPD relevance.

General Compliance Oversight by SACAP

• Conduct random audits of CPD records.
• Notify professionals of renewal requirements and non-compliance.
• Review validated CPD activities for relevance and quality.
• Enforce penalties for non-compliance, including fines and deregistration.

COMPETITION

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Statement on the latest decisions by the Competition Commission

Date: 09 October 2025

SUMMARY AND WHO IT APPLIES TO: 

Mergers & Acquisitions Reviewed

2. Complaints (Non-Referrals)

The Commission found no contravention of the Competition Act in complaints involving:

• Private Companies: Lactalis SA, Sibanye Stillwater, Glencore, Henkel SA, Afrox, Asbis Africa, SMD Technologies, African Paper Products.
• Public Entities: National Treasury, Gauteng Dept. of Human Settlements.
• Educational Institutions: Reddam House School, various universities.
• Non-Profit / Religious Bodies: South African Hajj and Umrah Council (SAHUC).
• Individuals: Various complainants including NUMSA members and Salomon Jacobs.

Organizations This Notice Applies To

• Local and international firms involved in South African mergers or acquisitions.
• Entities operating in regulated sectors like mining, finance, insurance, property, and education.
• Government departments and public institutions subject to competition-related complaints.
• Any organisation whose conduct may affect market competition or public interest under the Competition Act.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

Media Statement

For Immediate Release

09 October 2025

STATEMENT ON THE LATEST DECISIONS BY THE COMPETITION COMMISSION

The Competition Commission of South Africa (CCSA) held its ordinary meeting on Tuesday, 07 October 2025, to review and take decisions on matters brought before the Commission by members of the public and corporate applicants, in terms of the Competition Act (89 of 1998) as amended. These matters include but are not limited to complaints, mergers, and acquisitions.

1.MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS

1.1 BWS Holdings Limited (“BWS Holdings”) / Just Group plc (“Just Group”)

The Commission has recommended that the Competition Tribunal (“Tribunal”) approves the proposed transaction whereby BWS Holdings intends to acquire Just Group, with conditions.

The Acquiring Firm is a private entity incorporated under the laws of Bermuda. The Acquiring Firm is wholly owned by Brookfield Wealth Solutions Limited (“BWS”). BWS is an entity incorporated under the laws of Bermuda and is listed on the New York Stock Exchange and the Toronto Stock Exchange. BWS is not controlled by any single firm. The Acquiring Firm does not control any firms in South Africa. The Acquiring Firm and all firms that are directly and indirectly controlled by the Acquiring Firm will be referred to as the “Acquiring Group”.

The Acquiring Group is active in the financial and insurance services industry. In particular, the Acquiring Group provides annuities, life insurance, property and casualty protection insurance and pension risk transfers. The Acquiring Group does not conduct any activities or offer any of its services in South Africa.

The Target Firm is a public entity incorporated under the laws of England and Wales. The Target Firm is also listed on the London Stock Exchange. The Target Firm is not controlled by any single firm. The Target Firm controls various firms. In South Africa, the Target Firm has sole control over Just Retirement (South Africa) Holdings Proprietary Limited (“Just SA Holdings”). Just SA Holdings wholly owns Just Retirement Life (South Africa) Limited (“JRSA”).

The Target Firm provides retirement specialist financial services which include (i) defined benefit pension de-risking, (ii) individual retirement income or care related solutions which includes guaranteed income for life, secure lifetime income, care plan and lifetime mortgage options, and (iii) professional broking and advice solutions. In South Africa, Just SA Holdings through JRSA, provides retirement income and life annuity solutions.

The Commission is of the view that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially lessen or prevent competition in any market.

To address public interest concerns, the merged entity has undertaken to increase its current spend on qualifying initiatives which include supplier development, skills development, and enterprise development.

1.2 ManganExx (Pty) Ltd (“ManganExx”), ultimately controlled by Exxaro Resources Limited (“Exxaro”) / Ntsimbintle Mining (Pty) Ltd (“Ntsimbintle”), Ntsimbintle Marketing and Trading Private Ltd (“Ntsimbintle Marketing”) and Mokala Manganese (Pty) Ltd (“Mokala”) (collectively, the “Target Firms”)

The Commission has recommended that the Tribunal approves the proposed transaction whereby ManganExx intends to acquire the Target Firms, with conditions.

The primary acquiring firm is ManganExx, a newly incorporated wholly owned subsidiary that is controlled by Exxaro. Exxaro is a public company listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) and is not controlled by any single shareholder.

Exxaro’s core operation is thermal, semi-soft coking and metallurgical coal mining. Exxaro also has interests in the mining of ferrous (iron) ore and zinc. Exxaro also has investments in renewable energy (wind and solar power).

The primary target firms are Ntsimbintle Mining, Ntsimbintle Marketing, and Mokala.

Ntsimbintle Mining is focused on the production and export of manganese ore. Ntsimbintle Marketing is the marketing firm for manganese ore products. Mokala focuses on the exploration, extraction, sale, and shipping of manganese ore from the Mokala Mine, which is situated at the Gloria Farm in the Joe Morolong Local Municipality in the Northern Cape.

To address competition concerns, the merged entity has agreed to information exchange conditions.

The proposed transaction does not raise significant public interest concerns.

1.3 BSI Steel Holdings Proprietary Limited (“BSI”) / Clotan Steel Proprietary Limited (“Clotan”)

The Commission has approved the proposed transaction whereby BSI intends to acquire Clotan, with conditions.

The primary acquiring firm is BSI.

BSI is broadly active in the market for steel processing and distribution. Of relevance to the proposed merger are the Acquiring Group’s coil slitting, cold-formed lip channels and roofing products.

The primary target firm is Clotan.

Clotan is broadly active in the manufacture and distribution of steel products with a primary focus on roofing solutions and steel processing services. In addition, Clotan also offers technical support services for the service it provides. Of relevance to the proposed merger is that Clotan also engages in coil slitting, cold-formed lip channels and roofing products.

The Commission is of the view that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially lessen or prevent competition in any market.

To address public interest concerns, the merged entity will limit any retrenchments as a result of the merger to a maximum of 15 employees for a period of two years following the merger implementation date. In addition, the merged entity has undertaken to implement skills development including learnerships.

1.4 Caperfield Investments Proprietary Limited (“Caperfield Investments”) / K2012150042 (South Africa) Proprietary Limited (“K2012”) in respect of the letting enterprise known as Montague Industrial Park (the “Target Property”)

The Commission has approved the proposed transaction whereby Caperfield Investments intends to acquire the Target Property, with conditions.

The primary acquiring firm, Caperfield Investments, is ultimately controlled by a trust. Caperfield Investments does not control any firms. All the firms controlled by the trust will collectively be referred to as the “Acquiring Group”.

The Acquiring Group is a private property investment and development group which holds a portfolio of office, retail and industrial properties situated in the Western Cape Province.

The primary target firm is a light industrial property situated at Montague Drive, Montague Gardens, Western Cape Province, known as Montague Gardens Industrial Park (“Target Property”). The Target Property is currently owned by K2012.

The Commission is of the view that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially lessen or prevent competition in any market.

To address public interest concerns, the Acquiring Firm has committed to procuring property management services from suppliers that are historically disadvantaged persons (HDPs).

1.5 Differential Capital UK Acquisition Corporation Limited (“UK Bidco”) / The Cementation Company (Africa) Proprietary Limited (“TCCA”)

The Commission has approved the proposed transaction whereby UK Bidco intends to acquire TCCA, without conditions.

The primary acquiring firm is UK Bidco, a special purpose vehicle incorporated for the purposes of this proposed transaction. UK Bidco will be solely controlled by Differential Capital Proprietary Limited (“Differential Capital”). UK Bidco and the firms that control it will collectively be referred to as the “Acquiring Group”.

The Acquiring Group, through Differential Capital, is an asset management company operating in South Africa and managing investments (retirement funds and hedge funds) on behalf of its clients.

The primary target firm is TCCA. TCCA is a wholly owned subsidiary of Murray and Roberts Limited, a firm that is currently in business rescue. TCCA wholly owns Cementation Africa Proprietary Limited (“Cementation Africa”) and Cementation Emgodini Proprietary Limited. TCCA and its subsidiaries will collectively be referred to as the “Target Group”.

The Target Group offers full-service engineering and construction contracting services to the mining sector in South Africa and in other African countries (“mining contracting services”). The Target Group’s mining contracting services include underground mine development and shaft sinking, trackless mechanised mining, mining services and raise drilling, engineering design, trackless mining machinery rebuild and fabrication workshop services, and underground infrastructure construction.

The Commission is of the view that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially lessen or prevent competition in any market. The proposed transaction does not raise significant public interest concerns.

2. COMPLAINTS (NON-REFERRALS)

2.1 NUMSA Members of Neven Matthews Pty Ltd v Neven Matthews Pty Ltd

The Commission is of the view that the conduct complained of does not contravene the Competition Act.

2.2 Dr Quraysha Ismail Sooliman v South African Hajj and Umrah Council (SAHUC)

The Commission is of the view that the conduct complained of does not contravene the Competition Act.

2.3 Tejas Chauhan v Lactalis South Africa

The Commission is of the view that the conduct complained of does not contravene the Competition Act.

2.4 Itumeleng Mataboge v Sibanye Stillwater and Glencore

The Commission is of the view that the conduct complained of does not contravene the Competition Act.

2.5 Ndlela Mazibuko v Reddam House School South Africa and School & Leisure

The Commission is of the view that the conduct complained of does not contravene the Competition Act.

2.6 Gauteng Department of Human Settlements v Various Civil Engeneering and Construction Service Provider

The Commission is of the view that the conduct complained of does not contravene the Competition Act.

2.7 Anonymous v National Treasury of South Africa

The Commission is of the view that the conduct complained of does not contravene the Competition Act.

2.8 SMD Technologies (Pty) Ltd v Asbis Africa (Pty) Ltd

The Commission is of the view that the conduct complained of does not contravene the Competition Act.

2.9 African Paper Products Proprietary Limited v Henkel South Africa Proprietary Limited

The Commission is of the view that the conduct complained of does not contravene the Competition Act.

2.10 Salomon Jacobs v Afrox, a Linde Company

The Commission is of the view that the conduct complained of does not contravene the Competition Act.

2.11 National Validation Services v Various Universities in South Africa

The Commission is of the view that the conduct complained of does not contravene the Competition Act.

[ENDS]

Issued by:

Siyabulela Makunga, Spokesperson

On behalf of: The Competition Commission of South Africa

Tel: 012 394 3493 / 067 421 9883

Email: SiyabulelaM@compcom.co.za

Find us on the following social media platforms:

X: @CompComSA

Instagram: Competition Commission SA

Facebook, Linkedin and YouTube: The Competition Commission South Africa

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Statement on the latest decisions by the Competition Commission

Date: 09 October 2025

Read more

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Statement on the latest decisions by the Competition Commission

Date: 01 October 2025

SUMMARY AND WHO IT APPLIES TO: 

Healthcare & Pharmaceuticals

• SPAR Health (via M&B) acquired Aptekor Sneldiens and Aptekor Wholesale.
  • Affects pharmaceutical distribution to pharmacies, hospitals, NGOs, and government entities.

Automotive & Vehicle Components

• Allison Transmission Holdings acquired Dana OH, including its South African branch Dana SA.
  • Impacts suppliers of drivetrain and propulsion systems for industries like mining, agriculture, and construction.

• iCar Technologies acquired HeyCarter Dealerships.
  • Affects vehicle sales, OEM parts, and repair services in Gauteng and Bronkhorstspruit.

Technology & Electronics

• Sanmina Corporation acquired ZT Group International.
  • Impacts data center server manufacturing and electronic component supply.

Real Estate

• Urban Impact Rental Trust 100 acquired Atholl Yards, a residential property in Sandton.
  • Affects residential property investment and management in Gauteng.

Food & Beverage Manufacturing

• Sana Partners GP 2 acquired a shelf company that will hold AECI’s food and beverage business.
  • Impacts supply of ingredients and additives to food and beverage manufacturers.

Consumer Goods

• Lavender Bidco B.V. acquired Reckitt’s Essential Home business (brands like Airwick, Woolite, Mr Sheen).
  • Affects household cleaning and care product manufacturing and distribution.

Energy & Infrastructure

• Power Group Holdings acquired Brand Engineering Holdings.
  • Impacts renewable energy projects (wind and solar), electrical engineering services, and infrastructure development.

General Outcome

• All transactions were approved without conditions.
• The Commission found no substantial competition concerns or public interest issues in any of the cases.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

Media Statement

For Immediate Release

01 October 2025

STATEMENT ON THE LATEST DECISIONS BY THE COMPETITION COMMISSION

The Competition Commission of South Africa (CCSA) held its ordinary meeting on Tuesday, 30 September 2025, to review and take decisions on matters brought before the Commission by members of the public and corporate applicants, in terms of the Competition Act (89 of 1998) as amended. These matters include but are not limited to complaints, mergers, and acquisitions.

1.MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS

1.1 Malan and Buys Proprietary Limited (“M&B”) / Aptekor Sneldiens Proprietary Limited (“Aptekor Sneldiens”) and Aptekor Wholesale Proprietary Limited (“Aptekor Wholesale”)

The Commission has recommended that the Competition Tribunal approves the proposed transaction whereby M&B intends to acquire Aptekor Sneldiens and Aptekor Wholesale, without conditions.

The primary acquiring firm is M&B, a wholly owned subsidiary of SPAR Health Proprietary Limited, formerly named S Buys Holdings (Pty) Ltd (“SPAR Health”). SPAR Health is a wholly owned subsidiary of SPAR Group Limited (“SPAR Group”). The shares of SPAR Group are listed on the JSE Limited, and it is not controlled by any firm/s. M&B, its controlling firms and the firms controlled by its controlling firms, are collectively referred to as the “SPAR Group”.

The SPAR Group conducts a general wholesaling operation throughout South Africa. M&B operates as a full-line pharmaceutical wholesaler in Carletonville, Gauteng. M&B services pharmacies, hospitals, and healthcare professionals, as well as Government and various non-governmental organisations.

The primary target firms are Aptekor Wholesale and Aptekor Sneldiens.

Aptekor Wholesale is a pharmaceutical product wholesaler (business to business only) that services pharmacies, health shops, farm stalls, general retailers and other retailers in the Western and Northern Cape Provinces. Aptekor Sneldiens operates primarily as the internal courier service for Aptekor Wholesale.

The Commission is of the view that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially lessen or prevent competition in any market. The proposed transaction does not raise significant public interest concerns.

1.2 Allison Transmission Holdings, Inc (“Allison”) / Dana Incorporated’s Off-Highway business known as Dana OH (“Dana OH”)

The Commission has approved the proposed transaction whereby Allison intends to acquire Dana OH, without conditions.

The primary acquiring firm is Allison, a firm incorporated in the United States of America (USA) and listed on the New York Stock Exchange. Allison is not controlled by any firms. Allison controls several firms across the globe including Allison Transmission Europe B.V. (“Allison BV”), a subsidiary firm based in the Netherlands. Allison BV has a local branch in South Africa. Allison, all the firms controlled by Allison, and the firms controlled by those firms, are collectively referred to as the “Acquiring Group”.

The Acquiring Group designs and manufactures vehicle propulsion solutions, transmissions and electrified propulsion systems. The Acquiring Group’s South African branch provides support to Allison BV by providing localised sales and aftermarket service assistance to customers in South Africa.

The primary target firm is Dana OH, which is owned by Dana Incorporated, a firm incorporated in the USA. Dana OH controls several firms incorporated outside South Africa. In South Africa, Dana OH controls Dana SAC South Africa Proprietary Limited (“Dana SA”). Dana OH and all the firms controlled by Dana OH are collectively referred to as the “Target Group”.

The Target Group specialises in the manufacturing and supply of drivetrain, transmissions and propulsion solutions and supplies a diverse range of industries including construction, forestry, agriculture, material handling, industrial and mining. In South Africa, the Target Group operates through Dana SA, which is active in the supply of motor vehicle components, including transmissions.

The Commission is of the view that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially lessen or prevent competition in any market. The proposed transaction does not raise significant public interest concerns.

1.3 Sanmina Corporation (“Sanmina”) / ZT Group Int’l Inc. (“ZT”)

The Commission has approved the proposed transaction whereby Sanmina intends to acquire ZT, without conditions.

The primary acquiring firm is Sanmina, a public company incorporated in the USA. Sanmina is listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market and is not controlled by any firm. Sanmina controls various firms incorporated in several jurisdictions. In South Africa, Sanmina controls Sanmina-SCI Corporation Africa Proprietary Limited (“Sanmina-SCI”). Sanmina and all the firms it controls, will collectively be referred to as the “Acquiring Group”.

The Acquiring Group is a manufacturer of electronic components required in (amongst others) the manufacture and assembly of data centre servers. The Acquiring Group also provides repair, maintenance and after sales services required in that regard. Of relevance to this assessment are the Acquiring Group’s activities in the production of a limited number of data servers which are used to store and manage data and the supply of electronic components used to assemble data centre servers.

The primary target firm is ZT, a firm incorporated in the USA and wholly owned by Advanced Micro Devices, Inc (“AMD”). AMD is a listed firm incorporated in the USA and is not controlled by any firm. ZT and all the firms it controls are collectively referred to as the “Target Group”.

The Target Group is involved in the manufacturing of data centre servers, racks and clusters. The Target Group’s activities include manufacturing integrated data server solutions for data centre clients.

The Commission is of the view that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially lessen or prevent competition in any market. The proposed transaction does not raise significant public interest concerns.

1.4 Urban Impact Rental Trust 100 (“Urban 100”) / Atholl Yards (“Target Property”)

The Commission has approved the proposed transaction whereby Urban 100 intends to acquire the Target Property, without conditions.

The primary acquiring firm is Urban 100. Old Mutual Life Assurance Company South Africa Ltd (“OMLACSA”) is Urban 100’s controlling entity. OMLACSA is ultimately wholly owned and controlled by Old Mutual Limited. Old Mutual Limited is a public company listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) and is not controlled by a single shareholder. Urban 100, all the firms that control it, and all the firms controlled by its controlling entities, will collectively be referred to as the “Acquiring Group”.

Urban 100 is a residential property holding trust with four residential properties situated in Gauteng.

The primary target firm is the Target Property, a letting enterprise known as Atholl Yards. The Target Property is controlled by Citosolve.

The Target Property is a residential property situated at 114 Dennis Road, Atholl Gardens, Sandton, Gauteng.

The Commission is of the view that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially lessen or prevent competition in any market. The proposed transaction does not raise significant public interest concerns.

1.5 iCar Technologies (Pty) Ltd (“iCar”) / HeyCarter Dealerships (Pty) Ltd (“HeyCarter Dealerships”)

The Commission has approved the proposed transaction whereby iCar intends to acquire HeyCarter Dealerships, without conditions.

The primary acquiring firm, iCar, is controlled by an individual. iCar controls Armoured Mobility (Pty) Ltd and Lynwood Enterprise (Pty) Ltd. iCar, the firms it controls and the firm controlling it, are collectively referred to as the “Acquiring Group”.

The Acquiring Group, through iCar, is active in the sale of new and used passenger vehicles (PVs), the sale of original equipment manufacturer (OEM) parts and accessories, and the repair and maintenance of motor vehicles. The Acquiring Group operates the following six motor dealership businesses: Digicars, Chery Sandton, Chery Northcliff, Omoda Jaecoo Sandton, Omoda Jaecoo Melrose Arch, and Armoured Mobility. The Acquiring Group’s dealerships are all located in Johannesburg, Gauteng.

The primary target firm, HeyCarter Dealerships, is controlled by HeyCarter (Pty) Ltd (“HeyCarter”). HeyCarter is controlled by MyMostAwesome (Pty) Ltd (“MMA”). HeyCarter Dealerships does not control any firm.

HeyCarter Dealerships is a motor dealership group that is also involved in the sale of new and used PVs, the sale of new and used light commercial vehicles (LCVs), OEM vehicle accessories and parts, vehicle financing services, and repair and maintenance services. Of relevance to the merger are its Ford/Mahindra, GWM/Renault, Nissan, Chery/Mitsubishi, and Volkswagen dealerships which are located in Bronkhorstspruit. For the avoidance of doubt, HeyCarter Dealerships does not include the Suzuki Rosebank dealership.

The Commission is of the view that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially lessen or prevent competition in any market. The proposed transaction does not raise significant public interest concerns.

1.6 Sana Partners GP 2 Proprietary Limited (“Sana Partners GP 2”) / K2024012540 (South Africa) Proprietary Limited (“K2024012540 (South Africa)”)

The Commission has approved the proposed transaction whereby Sana Partners GP 2 intends to acquire K2024012540 (South Africa), without conditions.

The primary acquiring firm, Sana Partners GP 2, is the ultimate general partner of Sana Partners Fund 2 (“Sana Partners Fund 2”), an en commandite partnership. Sana Partners Fund 2 is directly controlled by its general partner, Sana Partners GP 2. Sana Partners GP 2 is in turn a wholly owned subsidiary of Sana Partners Proprietary Limited. Sana Partners GP 2, its controlling firms and the entities controlled by its controlling firm, are collectively referred to as the “Sana Partners Group”.

The Sana Partners Group consists of two private equity funds focused on investing in mid-size companies in South Africa.

The primary target firm, K2024012540 (South Africa), is wholly controlled by AECI Limited (“AECI”). AECI is listed on the JSE, and it is not controlled by any of its shareholders.

K2024012540 (South Africa) is a shelf company incorporated for purposes of the proposed transaction. Prior to the implementation of the proposed transaction, AECI will transfer its food and beverages business (“AECI F&B”) to K2024012540 (South Africa). AECI F&B is a manufacturer and supplier of ingredients and additives to the food and beverage manufacturing industries in South Africa. AECI F&B operates through its (i) food ingredients, (ii) beverages and (iii) processing aids businesses.

The Commission is of the view that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially lessen or prevent competition in any market. The proposed transaction does not raise significant public interest concerns.

1.7 Lavender Bidco B.V (“Lavender”) / Essential Home business (“Target Business”) of Reckitt Benckiser Group plc (“Reckitt”)

The Commission has approved the proposed transaction whereby Lavender intends to acquire the Target Business, without conditions.

The primary acquiring firm is Lavender, a special purpose vehicle established for purposes of the proposed transaction. Lavender is incorporated under the laws of the Netherlands and is controlled by Advent L.P (“Advent”). Lavender does not control any other firm. Advent controls several subsidiaries incorporated in South Africa.

The Acquiring Group, through Advent, is a private equity investment business with investment funds in various sectors.

The primary target firm is the Essential Home business of Reckitt. The Target Business is controlled by Reckitt, which is listed on the London Stock Exchange and is not controlled by any firm or individual.

Globally, the Target Firm comprises various rights, assets and entities that currently sit within Reckitt and that constitute the Essential Home business. These brands include Airwick, Windolene, Nugget, Brasso, Woolite, Silvo, Cillit Bang, Aerogard, Calgon, Easy Off, Vitroclen and Mr Sheen. These brands are manufactured and distributed by Reckitt SA in Ekurhuleni and will continue to be manufactured and distributed by Reckitt SA post-merger.

The Commission is of the view that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially lessen or prevent competition in any market. The proposed transaction does not raise significant public interest concerns.

1.8 Power Group Holdings (Pty) Ltd (“PGH”) / Brand Engineering Holdings (Pty) Ltd (“Brand Engineering”)

The Commission has approved the proposed transaction whereby PGH intends to acquire Brand Engineering, without conditions.

The primary acquiring firm, PGH, is controlled by a trust. PGH controls several firms including Power Construction (Pty) Ltd and Power Development Projects (Pty) Ltd. PGH and all the firms it controls are collectively referred to as the “Acquiring Group”.

The Acquiring Group is an infrastructure and property development company which provides a full range of services across civil engineering construction including roads and earthworks, building solutions, materials supply, and aggregate mining, manufacturing and property development related services. Of relevance to this merger assessment are the Acquiring Group’s renewable energy sector activities which it conducts in its own right and others, and conducted jointly with the target firm, Brand Engineering. These activities include wind energy projects under the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy’s (DMRE) Renewable Energy Independent Power Producer Procurement Programme (“REIPPPP”) as well as renewable energy solutions for commercial and industrial clients.

The primary target firm, Brand Engineering, is controlled by a trust. Brand Engineering controls Besamandla (Pty) Ltd (“Besamandla”), Brand Engineering S.A (Pty) Ltd and Brand Engineering Properties (Pty) Ltd. Brand Engineering and the firms it controls are collectively referred to as the “Target Group”.

The Target Group is a specialist electrical engineering contractor which serves the industrial, commercial, and infrastructure sectors. The Target Group delivers a full spectrum of electrical services from design to procurement, construction, commissioning and maintenance, either as a turnkey solution or on a component basis. Of relevance to this merger assessment is that the Target Group is active in the wind energy projects jointly with the Acquiring Group and providing rooftop solar to commercial and industrial customers.

The Commission is of the view that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially lessen or prevent competition in any market. The proposed transaction does not raise significant public interest concerns.

[ENDS]

Issued by:

Siyabulela Makunga, Spokesperson

On behalf of: The Competition Commission of South Africa

Tel: 012 394 3493 / 067 421 9883

Email: SiyabulelaM@compcom.co.za

Find us on the following social media platforms:

X: @CompComSA

Instagram: Competition Commission SA

Facebook, Linkedin and YouTube: The Competition Commission South Africa

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Statement on the latest decisions by the Competition Commission

Date: 01 October 2025

Read more

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Competition Act: Approved mergers

G. 53574 GeN 3569

24 October 2025

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Competition Act: Approved mergers

G. 53574 GeN 3569

24 October 2025

53574gen3569.pdf

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Competition Act: Complaint referrals

G. 53574 GeN 3570

24 October 2025

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Competition Act: Complaint referrals

G. 53574 GeN 3570

24 October 2025

53574gen3570.pdf

CONSUMER PROTECTION

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Consumer Protection Act:

National Consumer Commission: Notice of withdrawal of National Consumer Commission’s Enforcement Guidelines

G 53515 GoN 6745

17 October 2025

APPLIES TO: 

Consumer Protection Bodies

• Especially the National Consumer Commission (NCC) itself, which will need to revise its enforcement practices.
• Provincial consumer protection offices that may have relied on these guidelines.

Businesses and Corporations

• Particularly those operating in retail, services, and manufacturing, as they are subject to the Consumer Protection Act (CPA) 68 of 2008.
• Legal and compliance departments will need to ensure their practices align directly with the CPA, rather than relying on the now-withdrawn guidelines.

Legal Practitioners and Regulatory Advisors

• Those who represent clients before the National Consumer Tribunal will need to adjust their strategies and arguments, as the guidelines can no longer be cited.

The National Consumer Tribunal

• The withdrawal aims to prevent “opportunistic points” being raised due to inconsistencies between the guidelines and the CPA, which directly affects how the Tribunal adjudicates cases.

Consumer Advocacy Groups

• These groups may need to update their educational materials and advocacy strategies to reflect the change.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Consumer Protection Act: National Consumer Commission: Notice of withdrawal of National Consumer Commission’s Enforcement Guidelines

G 53515 GoN 6745

17 October 2025

53515gon6745.pdf

ACTION

National Consumer Commission (NCC)

• Update internal procedures to align strictly with the Consumer Protection Act (CPA) 68 of 2008, without relying on the withdrawn guidelines.
• Communicate the change to stakeholders, including provincial consumer offices and the public.
• Train staff on interpreting and applying the CPA directly in enforcement actions.

Businesses and Corporations

• Review compliance frameworks to ensure they are based solely on the CPA, not the withdrawn guidelines.
• Update legal and regulatory policies to reflect the change.
• Engage legal counsel to reassess risk exposure in consumer-related matters.
• Educate customer service and compliance teams on the implications of the withdrawal.

Legal Practitioners and Regulatory Advisors

• Stop referencing the withdrawn guidelines in Tribunal proceedings.
• Reassess ongoing cases to ensure arguments are based on the CPA.
• Advise clients on the implications for consumer rights and business obligations.

National Consumer Tribunal

• Adjust adjudication protocols to exclude reliance on the withdrawn guidelines.
• Ensure consistency in rulings by strictly applying the CPA.
• Notify parties in active cases about the change, if relevant.

Consumer Advocacy Groups

• Update educational materials and public awareness campaigns.
• Inform consumers that enforcement will now be based directly on the CPA.
• Monitor enforcement trends to ensure consumer rights are upheld effectively.

CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa:

Investigation into Alleged Dumping of Flat-Rolled Products of Iron or Non-Alloy Steel

G 53515 GeN 3560

17 October 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1. Domestic Manufacturers

• ArcelorMittal South Africa Ltd (AMSA) and SAFAL Steel (Pty) Ltd, who lodged the complaint, are directly impacted.
• Other local steel producers in the Southern African Customs Union (SACU) may also be affected positively if anti-dumping measures are eventually imposed, as these could reduce unfair competition from dumped imports.

2. Importers and Distributors

• Companies that import flat-rolled steel products from China, especially those under tariff subheadings:
  • 7210.61.20
  • 7210.61.30
  • 7225.92.25
  • 7225.92.35
    These businesses may face increased costs or reduced supply due to safeguard duties or potential future anti-dumping duties.

3. Downstream Industries

• Manufacturers and fabricators that use these steel products as inputs (e.g., construction, automotive, appliance manufacturing) could be affected by:
  • Price increases
  • Supply chain disruptions
  • Reduced availability of imported materials

4. Exporters from China

• Chinese companies exporting the subject products to SACU countries may face reduced demand or legal barriers if dumping is confirmed and duties are imposed.

5. Regulatory and Trade Bodies

• The International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa (ITAC) is conducting the investigation.
• Other trade and customs authorities in SACU member states may be involved in enforcement or monitoring.

SUMMED UP

The International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa (ITAC) initiated an investigation into the alleged dumping of:

• Flat-rolled products of iron or non-alloy steel, coated with aluminium-zinc alloys, and
• Flat-rolled products of other alloy steel, coated with zinc,
• Both types with a width of 600 mm or more and thickness less than 0.45 mm,
• Originating from or imported from China.

Reason for Investigation

• The complaint was lodged by ArcelorMittal South Africa Ltd (AMSA) and SAFAL Steel (Pty) Ltd.
• They alleged that these products are being dumped into the Southern African Customs Union (SACU) market.
• The dumping is causing material injury to the SACU industry.

Preliminary Findings

• ITAC found prima facie evidence of dumping and material injury.
• A causal link was established between dumped imports and the injury.
• However, no provisional anti-dumping duties were imposed at this stage because:
  • Safeguard duties were already imposed on 27 June 2025.
  • Imposing additional duties could raise costs for downstream users.

Next Steps

• Interested parties must submit written comments within 14 days of the preliminary report’s release.
• Requests for extensions (up to 7 days) must be properly motivated and submitted before the deadline.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

COATED, WITH ALUMINIUM-ZINC ALLOYS, OF A THICKNESS OF LESS THAN 0.45MM AND FLAT-ROLLED PRODUCTS OF OTHER ALLOY STEEL, OF A WIDTH OF 600 MM OR MORE, OTHERWISE PLATED OR COATED WITH ZINC, OF A THICKNESS OF LESS THAN 0,45MM ORIGINATING IN OR IMPORTED FROM THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA

On 20 March 2024, the International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa (“the Commission”) initiated an investigation into the alleged dumping of flat-rolled products of iron or non-alloy steel, of a width of 600 mm or more, clad, plated or coated, with aluminium-zinc alloys, of a thickness of less than 0.45mm, classifiable under tariff subheadings 7210.61.20 and 7210.61.30 and flat-rolled products of other alloy steel, of a width of 600 mm or more, otherwise plated or coated with zinc, of a thickness of less than 0,45mm, classifiable under tariff subheadings 7225.92.25 and 7225.92.35 (“corrosion resistant steel coil” or “the subject product”) originating in or imported from the People’s Republic of China (“China”) through Notice number 3071 of 2025 in Government Gazette number 52348.

The investigation was initiated after the Commission considered the application lodged by ArcelorMittal South Africa Ltd (“AMSA”) and SAFAL Steel (Pty) Ltd (“SAFAL”) (“the Applicant”) alleging that the subject product originating in or imported from China is being dumped onto the Southern African Customs Union (“SACU”), causing material injury to the SACU market. The Commission was satisfied that the Applicant submitted sufficient evidence and established a prima facie case to enable the Commission to arrive to a reasonable conclusion that an investigation should be initiated based on dumping, material injury and a causal link between the alleged dumped imports and the material injury experienced by the SACU Industry.

Subsequent to initiation of the investigation, all known interested parties were sent the nonconfidential

application and requested to respond to the relevant questionnaires.

On 09 September 2025, the Commission, after considering all the information available to it, made a preliminary determination that the subject product originating in or imported from China is being dumped in the SACU. The Commission also made a preliminary determination that the SACU Industry is experiencing material injury and that there is a causal link between the dumped imports and the material injury experienced by the SACU Industry.

Notwithstanding the findings set out in its report, the Commission made a preliminary determination not to impose provisional anti-dumping duties at this stage. This recommendation is based on the fact that provisional safeguard duties were already imposed on 27 June 2025 on imports of the subject product. These safeguard duties may have already contributed to deterring imports and may have had a positive impact on the domestic industry’s situation. Moreover, the Commission found that not imposing provisional duties could minimise the cost-raising effect on the downstream users of the subject product.

The basis and reasons for the Commission’s findings are set out in its Preliminary Report No. 758, wherein the decisions regarding its determination are detailed.

PROCEDURAL FRAMEWORK

This investigation is conducted in terms of section 16 of the International Trade Administration Act, 2002 (the ITA Act) and the relevant sections of the ITA Act and the Anti-Dumping Regulations of the International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa (ADR).

Both the ITA Act and the ADR are available on the Commission’s website (www.itac.org.za) or from the Trade Remedies division, on request.

Interested parties are invited to comment in writing to the Commission’s preliminary determination within 14 days from the date the preliminary report is made available.

Comments received after the due date will not be accepted except with the prior written consent of the Commission. The Commission will give due consideration to written requests for an extension of not more than 7 days on good cause shown (properly motivated and substantiated), if received prior to the expiry of the 14-day period. Merely citing insufficient time is not an acceptable reason for an extension.

ADDRESS

The response to the questionnaire and any information regarding this matter and any arguments concerning the allegation of dumping and the resulting material injury and threat of material injury must be submitted in writing to the following address:

Physical address

Senior Manager: Trade Remedies

International Trade Administration Commission

Block E – The DTI Campus

77 Meintjies Street

SUNNYSIDE SOUTH AFRICA

PRETORIA

SOUTH AFRICA

Postal address

Senior Manager: Trade Remedies I

Private Bag X753

PRETORIA

0001

PRETORIA

SOUTH AFRICA

Should you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact the following investigating officers: Mr Busman Makakola at BMakakola@itac.org.za, Ms Mosa Sebe at Msebe@itac.org.za and Mr Brian Same at BSame@itac.org.za.

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa: Investigation into Alleged Dumping of Flat-Rolled Products of Iron or Non-Alloy Steel

G 53515 GeN 3560

17 October 2025

53515gen3560.pdf

ACTION

1. Review and Respond to the Investigation

• Importers, exporters, and manufacturers of the subject steel products should:
  • Review the Preliminary Report No. 758 issued by the Commission.
  • Submit written comments or responses to the Commission’s preliminary determination within 14 days of the report’s release.
  • If needed, request a 7-day extension with proper motivation before the deadline.

2. Submit Required Documentation

• Complete and submit the questionnaire provided by the Commission.
• Include:
  • Import/export data
  • Pricing structures
  • Market impact assessments
  • Any arguments or evidence regarding the alleged dumping or injury

3. Legal and Trade Compliance

• Ensure compliance with:
  • International Trade Administration Act, 2002
  • Anti-Dumping Regulations (ADR)
• Consult legal or trade experts to understand implications and prepare documentation.

4. Monitor Duties and Tariff Changes

• Stay updated on:
  • Safeguard duties already imposed (as of 27 June 2025)
  • Potential future anti-dumping duties
• Adjust procurement and pricing strategies accordingly.

5. Engage with Industry Associations

• Collaborate with industry bodies or chambers of commerce to:
  • Share insights
  • Coordinate responses
  • Advocate for fair outcomes

6. Communicate with Stakeholders

• Inform internal teams (procurement, legal, finance) and external partners about:
  • Possible cost implications
  • Supply chain adjustments
  • Strategic responses

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Customs and Excise Act: Schedule No. 1 (No. 1/1963) (English / Afrikaans)

G 53572 RG 11899 GoN 6756

24 October 2025

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Customs and Excise Act: Schedule No. 1 (No. 1/1963) (English / Afrikaans)

G 53572 RG 11899 GoN 6756

24 October 2025

53572rg11899gon6756.pdf

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

International Trade Administration Act:

Initiation of investigation into alleged dumping of tubes and pipes

G 53574 GeN 3568

24 October 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1. Importers of Steel Pipes from Mozambique

• Companies that import electric resistance welded (ERW) and spiral welded/submerged arc welded (SAW) steel pipes with an external diameter exceeding 406.4 mm from Mozambique.
• These importers may face additional duties or restrictions if dumping is confirmed.

2. Exporters and Manufacturers in Mozambique

• Mozambican producers and exporters of the specified steel pipes are directly implicated in the dumping allegations.
• They may be required to submit detailed data and could face anti-dumping duties if the investigation confirms unfair pricing.

3. South African Domestic Producers

• Especially Hall Longmore (Proprietary) Limited, the applicant, and other local manufacturers of similar steel pipes.
• These organisations are considered to be suffering material injury or a threat thereof due to the alleged dumping.

4. Industry Associations

• Both in South Africa and Mozambique, including steel industry associations, trade bodies, and chambers of commerce.
• They may be contacted for information or may wish to make representations during the investigation.

5. Trade and Legal Consultants

• Firms that assist with trade remedy cases, customs compliance, or international trade law.
• They may be engaged by affected parties to prepare submissions or represent them in hearings.

6. Government Trade Representatives

• Particularly those from Mozambique, who have already been notified.
• They may be involved in diplomatic or trade discussions related to the investigation.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

DEPARTMENT OF TRADE, INDUSTRY AND COMPETITION

NOTICE 3568 OF 2025

INTERNATIONAL TRADE ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION

NOTICE OF INITIATION OF THE INVESTIGATION INTO THE ALLEGED DUMPING OF TUBES AND PIPES HAVING CIRCULAR CROSS-SECTIONS, WITH AN EXTERNAL DIAMETER WHICH EXCEEDS 406,4MM, OF IRON OR STEEL (EXCLUDING LONGITUDINALLY SUBMERGED ACR WELDED AND LONGITUDINALLY WELDED PIPES) ORIGINATING IN OR IMPORTED FROM THE REPUBLIC OF MOZAMBIQUE (“MOZAMBIQUE”) (“ELECTRIC RESISTANCE WELDED PIPES (“ERW”) AND SPIRAL WELDED PIPES/SUBMERGED ARC WELDED PIPES (“SAW”)

The International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa (“the Commission”) decided to proceed with an investigation into the alleged dumping of tubes and pipes having circular cross-sections, with an external diameter which exceeds 406,4mm, of iron or steel (excluding longitudinally submerged Acr welded and longitudinally welded pipes) commonly referred to as Electric Resistance Welded pipes (“ERW”) and Spiral welded pipes/Submerged Arc Welded pipes (“SAW” ) classifiable under tariff subheading 7305.19 originating in or imported from the Republic of Mozambique.

THE APPLICANT

The Application was lodged by Hall Longmore (Proprietary) Limited (“the Applicant”). The Applicant submitted an application to the Commission alleging that electric resistance welded pipes and spiral welded pipes originating in or imported from Mozambique are being dumped on the Southern African Customs Union(“SACU”), causing material injury and a threat of material injury to the SACU market. The Applicant submitted sufficient evidence and established a prima facie case to enable the Commission to arrive to a reasonable conclusion that an investigation should be initiated based on dumping, material injury, threat of material injury and a causal link between the alleged dumped imports and the material injury and the threat of material injury experienced by the SACU Industry.

THE PRODUCT

The product allegedly being dumped is steel tubes and pipes commonly referred to as electric resistance welded pipes and spiral welded pipes/submerged Arc welded pipes classifiable under tariff subheading 7305.19 originating in or imported from Mozambique.

THE ALLEGATION OF DUMPING

The allegation of dumping is based on the comparison between the normal value and the export prices from Mozambique.

The normal value for Mozambique was determined based the price quotations in Mozambique domestic market.

The export price was determined based on import statistics from the South African Revenue Services (“SARS”). This price was adjusted with 5 percent of the average ex-factory price.

On this basis, the Commission found that there was prima facie evidence of dumping of the subject products from Mozambique.

The dumping margin for Mozambique was determined to be 261.24%

THE ALLEGATION OF MATERIAL INJURY, THREAT OF MATERIAL INJURY AND CAUSAL LINK

The Applicant submitted evidence indicating that it experienced material injury in the form of the following injury indicators; price suppression, price undercutting, sales volumes, profit, market share, productivity, inventories and growth since imports of the subject product entered the SACU market in the period beginning 1 April 2022 – 31 March 2025.

The Applicant alleged that a threat of material injury exists and submitted evidence with regards to the freely disposable capacity of the exporters, significant increase of the alleged dumped imports, the state of the economy in Mozambique and prices of imports which will have a significant suppressing effect on domestic prices.

Further to that, the Applicant provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the material injury and the threat of material injury experienced by it can be linked to the alleged dumped imports.

On this basis, the Commission found that there was prima facie proof of material injury, a threat of material injury and causal link.

PERIOD OF INVESTIGATION

The period of investigation for the purpose of determining the dumping margin is from 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025. The period of investigation for the purpose of determining material injury is from 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2025.

PROCEDURAL FRAMEWORK

Having decided that there is sufficient evidence and a prima facie case to justify the initiation of an investigation, the Commission has begun an investigation in terms of section 16 of the International Trade Administration Act, 2002 (“the ITA Act”). The Commission will conduct its investigation in accordance with the relevant sections of the ITA Act and the Anti-Dumping Regulations of the International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa (“ADR”). Both the ITA Act and the ADR are available on the Commission’s website (www.itac.org.za) or from the Trade Remedies section, on request.

To obtain the information it deems necessary for its investigation, the Commission will send non-confidential versions of the application and questionnaires to all known importers and exporters and known representative associations. The trade representatives of the exporting countries have also been notified. Importers, exporters and other interested parties are invited to contact the Commission as soon as possible to determine whether they have been listed and were furnished with the relevant documentation. If not, they should immediately ensure that they are sent copies. The questionnaire must be completed and any other representations must be made within the time limit set out below.

CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

Please note that if any information is considered to be confidential then a non-confidential version of the information must be submitted for the public file, simultaneously with the confidential version. In submitting a non-confidential version, the following rules are strictly applicable and parties must indicate:

• where confidential information has been omitted and the nature of such information;

• reasons for such confidentiality;

• a summary of the confidential information which permits a reasonable understanding of the substance of the confidential information; and

• In exceptional cases, where information is not susceptible to summary, a sworn affidavit setting out the reasons why it is impossible to comply should be provided.

A sworn affidavit is defined as a written sworn statement of fact voluntarily made by an affiant or deponent under an oath or affirmation administered by a person authorized to do so by law. Such statement is witnessed as to the authenticity of the affiant’s signature by a taker of oaths, such as a notary public or commissioner of oaths. An affidavit is a type of verified statement or showing, or in other words, it contains verification, meaning it is under oath or penalty of perjury and this serves as evidence to its veracity and is required for court proceedings.

This rule applies to all parties and to all correspondence with and submissions to the Commission, which unless indicated to be confidential and filed together with a non confidential version, will be placed on the public file and be made available to other interested parties.

If a party considers that any document of another party, on which that party is submitting representations, does not comply with the above rules and that such deficiency affects that party’s ability to make meaningful representations, the details of the deficiency and the reasons why that party’s rights are so affected must be submitted to the Commission in writing forthwith (and at the latest 14 days prior to the date on which that party’s submission is due). Failure to do so timeously will seriously hamper the proper administration of the investigation, and such party will not be able to subsequently claim an inability to make meaningful representations based on the failure of such other party to meet the requirements.

Subsection 33(1) of the ITA Act provides that any person claiming confidentiality of information should identify whether such information is confidential by nature or is otherwise confidential and, any such claims must be supported by a written statement, in each case, setting out how the information satisfies the requirements of the claim to confidentiality. In the alternative, a sworn statement should be made setting out reasons why it is impossible to comply with these requirements.

Section 2.3 of the ADR provides as follows:

“The following list indicates “information that is by nature confidential” as per section 33(1) (a) of the Main Act, read with section 36 of the Promotion of Access to Information Act (Act 2 of 2000):

(a) management accounts;

(b) financial accounts of a private company;

(c) actual and individual sales prices;

(d) actual costs, including cost of production and importation cost;

(e) actual sales volumes;

(f) individual sales prices;

(g) information, the release of which could have serious consequences for the person that provided such information; and

(h) information that would be of significant competitive advantage to a competitor;

Provided that a party submitting such information indicates it to be confidential.”

ADDRESS

The response to the questionnaire and any information regarding this matter and any arguments concerning the allegation of dumping and the resulting material injury and threat of material injury must be submitted in writing to the following address:

Physical address

Senior Manager: Trade Remedies I

International Trade Administration Commission

Block E – The DTI Campus

77 Meintjies Street

SUNNYSIDE

PRETORIA

SOUTH AFRICA

Postal address

Senior Manager: Trade Remedies I

Private Bag X753

PRETORIA

0001

SOUTH AFRICA

PROCEDURES AND TIME LIMITS

All responses, including non-confidential copies of the responses, should be received by the Senior Manager: Trade Remedies I not later than 30 days from the date hereof, or from the date on which the letter accompanying the above-mentioned questionnaire was received. The said letter shall be deemed to have been received seven days after the day of its dispatch.

Late submissions will not be accepted except with the prior written consent of the Commission. The Commission will give due consideration to written requests for an extension of not more than 14 days on good cause shown (properly motivated and substantiated), if received prior to the expiry of the original 30-day period. Merely citing insufficient time is not an acceptable reason for extension. Please note that the Commission will not consider requests for extension by the Embassies on behalf of exporters.

The information submitted by any party may need to be verified by the Investigating Officers for the Commission to take such information into consideration. The Commission may verify the information at the premises of the party submitting the information, within a short period after the submission of the information to the Commission. Parties should therefore ensure that the information submitted will subsequently be available for verification. It is planned to do the verification of the information submitted by the exporters within three to five weeks subsequent to submission of the information. This period will only be extended if it is not feasible for the Commission to do it within this time period or upon good cause shown, and with the prior written consent of the Commission, which should be requested at the time of the submission. It should be noted that unavailability of, or inconvenience to consultants will not be considered as good cause.

Parties should also ensure when they engage consultants that they will be available at the requisite times, to ensure compliance with the above time frames. Parties should also ensure that all the information requested in the applicable questionnaire is provided in the specified detail and format. The questionnaires are designed to ensure that the Commission is provided with all the information required to make a determination in accordance with the rules of the ADR. The Commission may therefore refuse to verify information that is incomplete or does not comply with the format in the questionnaire, unless the Commission has agreed in writing to a deviation from the required format. A failure to submit an adequate non-confidential version of the response that complies with the rules set out above under the heading Confidential Information will be regarded as an incomplete submission.

Parties, who experience difficulty in furnishing the information required, or submitting in the format required, are therefore urged to make written applications to the Commission at an early stage for permission to deviate from the questionnaire or provide the information in an alternative format that can satisfy the Commission’s requirements. The Commission will give due consideration to such a request on good cause shown.

Any interested party may request an oral hearing at any stage of the investigation in accordance with Section 5 of the ADR, provided that the party indicates reasons for not relying on written submission only. The Commission may refuse an oral hearing if granting such hearing will unduly delay the finalisation of a determination. Parties requesting an oral hearing shall provide the Commission with a detailed agenda for, and a detailed version, including a non-confidential version, of the information to be discussed at the oral hearing at the time of the request.

If the required information and arguments are not received in a satisfactory form within the time limit specified above, or if verification of the information cannot take place, the Commission may disregard the information submitted and make a finding based on the facts available to it.

Should you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact the following investigating officers: Ms. Charity Mudzwiri at Cramaposa@itac.org.za and Mr Emmanuel Manamela at Emanamela@itac.org.za.

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

International Trade Administration Act: Initiation of investigation into alleged dumping of tubes and pipes

G 53574 GeN 3568

24 October 2025

53574gen3568.pdf

EDUCATION

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Higher Education Act:

Policy for recognition of South African Higher Education Institutional Types

G 53515 GoN 6741

17 October 2025

APPLIES TO: 

Public Universities

• Traditional universities (e.g., University of Cape Town, University of the Witwatersrand)
• Comprehensive universities (e.g., University of Johannesburg, Nelson Mandela University)
• Universities of technology (e.g., Tshwane University of Technology, Durban University of Technology)

Private Higher Education Institutions

• Institutions registered with the Department of Higher Education and Training offering accredited qualifications.

Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) Colleges

• Especially those transitioning or collaborating with universities under new classification models.

Regulatory Bodies and Councils

• Council on Higher Education (CHE)
• South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA)
• Quality Councils responsible for accreditation and oversight.

Government Departments and Agencies

• DHET itself, as well as provincial education departments involved in funding and oversight.

Students and Academic Staff

• Indirectly affected through changes in institutional mandates, program offerings, and qualification pathways.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Higher Education Act: Policy for recognition of South African Higher Education Institutional Types

G 53515 GoN 6741

17 October 2025

53515gon6741.pdf

ACTION

Actions Required by Universities and Higher Education Institutions

1.     Review and Align Institutional Mandates

o   Institutions must assess whether their current academic and research focus aligns with the new classification (e.g., university of technology, comprehensive university).

o   This may involve restructuring faculties, programs, or strategic goals.

2.     Update Governance and Reporting Structures

o   Institutions may need to revise governance frameworks to comply with new oversight or accountability requirements.

o   This includes updating internal policies and reporting mechanisms to meet DHET standards.

3.     Curriculum and Program Adjustments

o   Universities may be required to phase out or introduce programs based on their new classification.

o   For example, a university of technology may need to emphasize vocational and technical programs over purely academic ones.

4.     Accreditation and Quality Assurance Compliance

o   Institutions must ensure that all programs meet the standards set by the Council on Higher Education (CHE) and other quality assurance bodies.

o   This could involve re-accreditation of certain qualifications.

5.     Stakeholder Communication

o   Institutions should communicate changes to students, staff, and external partners.

o   This includes updating websites, prospectuses, and public-facing materials.

6.     Strategic Planning and Budgeting

o   Reclassification may affect funding models, requiring institutions to revise budgets and resource allocation.

o   Institutions may need to apply for new grants or adjust existing funding streams.

7.     Collaboration and Partnerships

o   Universities may be encouraged or required to form partnerships with TVET colleges, industry, or other institutions to support their new role.

ENVIRONMENTAL

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

National Environmental Management:

Protected Areas Act: Declaration of areas situated in the Western Cape and Northern Cape Provinces as part of the existing Tankwa Karoo National Park

G 53515 GoN 6738

17 October 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1. Conservation and Environmental Organizations

• NGOs and research institutions focused on biodiversity, wildlife protection, and ecological studies.
• Organizations managing conservation projects in the Karoo region.

2. Tourism and Hospitality Businesses

• Safari operators, tour companies, lodges, and guesthouses near Tankwa Karoo.
• Businesses offering outdoor activities like hiking, camping, or off-road driving.

3. Agricultural and Farming Enterprises

• Farms located within or adjacent to the newly declared areas may face land-use restrictions.
• Livestock grazing and crop cultivation could be limited to protect ecosystems.

4. Mining and Resource Extraction Companies

• Any mining or prospecting operations in the affected zones will likely be prohibited or heavily regulated.

5. Infrastructure and Development Firms

• Construction companies planning roads, pipelines, or energy projects in these areas will need environmental clearance.

6. Local Government and Municipal Authorities

• Municipalities in Western Cape and Northern Cape must align development plans with protected area regulations.

7. Academic and Scientific Institutions

• Universities conducting geological, ecological, or climate research in the Karoo region.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act: Declaration of areas situated in the Western Cape and Northern Cape Provinces as part of the existing Tankwa Karoo National Park

G 53515 GoN 6738

17 October 2025

53515gon6739.pdf

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act: Amendment: Consultation on declaring certain properties in the Eastern Cape as the new “Grassland National Park: Comments invited

G 53515 GoN 6738

– Comment by 17 Dec 2025

17 October 2025

APPLIES TO:

Private Landowners and Trusts:

• Individuals and trusts listed as owners of the properties proposed for inclusion in the park (e.g., Roberts Delwyn Owen, Roberts Farming Trust, Cornlands Trust, Sephton Phyllis Julia).
• These entities may face changes in land use rights, restrictions, or opportunities for conservation partnerships.

Local Government and Municipalities:

• Particularly those in Maclear and Barkly East registration divisions.
• They may need to adjust development plans, zoning regulations, and infrastructure projects to align with protected area status.

Environmental and Conservation Organizations:

• NGOs and community groups involved in biodiversity, land conservation, and ecological research may be stakeholders or collaborators in the park’s development and management.

Agricultural and Farming Entities:

• If any of the affected properties are currently used for farming or grazing, those operations may be impacted by new conservation regulations.

Tourism and Eco-Tourism Operators:

• Businesses operating in or near the proposed park area may be affected positively (through increased tourism) or negatively (through access restrictions).

Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE):

• As the initiating body, DFFE will oversee the consultation, declaration, and management of the new park.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act: Amendment: Consultation on declaring certain properties in the Eastern Cape as the new “Grassland National Park: Comments invited

G 53515 GoN 6738

– Comment by 17 Dec 2025

17 October 2025

53515gon6738.pdf

ACTION

Ensure you submit your comments before 17 December 2025

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

National Environmental Management Act:

National Guideline for consideration of Climate Change Implications in applications for Environmental Authorisations, Atmospheric Emission Licenses and Waste Management Licenses: Comments invited

G 53574 GoN 6759

– Comment by 24 Nov 2025

24 October 2025

APPLIES TO: 

Industrial and Manufacturing Companies

• Those involved in energy production, especially fossil fuel-based (e.g., coal, oil, gas).
• Chemical plants, cement factories, and steel manufacturers—due to high greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
• Feedlots and large-scale agricultural operations.

Construction and Infrastructure Developers

• Developers of roads, airports, railways, and urban expansion projects.
• Companies involved in clearing indigenous vegetation or altering wetlands and riparian zones.

Environmental Consulting Firms

• Especially those offering Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and climate change risk assessments.
• Specialists in carbon footprint analysis, GHG inventories, and adaptation planning.

Waste Management and Emissions Control Organizations

• Operators of waste disposal facilities, incinerators, and wastewater treatment plants.
• Entities applying for Waste Management Licenses (WML) or Atmospheric Emission Licenses (AEL).

Government Departments and Municipalities

• Local and provincial authorities responsible for approving development applications.
• Entities managing strategic water source areas, stormwater systems, and coastal infrastructure.

Renewable Energy and Sustainability Enterprises

• Solar, wind, and other low-carbon energy developers.
• Organizations promoting climate-resilient infrastructure and green building practices.

Research Institutions and NGOs

• Those conducting climate change vulnerability studies, biodiversity assessments, or community resilience planning.
• NGOs advocating for environmental justice, especially in vulnerable communities.

SUMMED UP

Purpose of the Guideline

• To ensure climate change implications are considered early in development planning.
• To guide stakeholders (e.g., applicants, EAPs, specialists, authorities) on how to assess and mitigate climate-related impacts.
• To align environmental assessments with South Africa’s domestic and international climate obligations (e.g., Paris Agreement, Climate Change Act 2024).

Legal Framework

• Based on the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) and related legislation (NEMAQA, NEMWA, CC Act).
• Supports constitutional rights to a healthy environment.
• Integrates international commitments like the Paris Agreement and Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).

Applicability

• Applies to new (greenfield) developments requiring EA, AEL, or WML.
• Not applicable to existing developments unless they are being extended.
• Encourages early involvement of climate change specialists in the EIA process.

Climate Change Impact Assessment Requirements

A climate change assessment is required when:

• The development emits significant GHGs.
• It affects climate-resilient infrastructure or ecosystems.
• It is vulnerable to climate change manifestations (e.g., floods, droughts).
• It exceeds thresholds in the National GHG Emission Reporting Regulations.

Assessment Content Must Include

• GHG emissions estimates (direct and indirect).
• Impact on carbon sinks and climate resilience infrastructure.
• Vulnerability and risk assessments.
• Alignment with national climate goals and mitigation strategies.
• Socio-economic and health impacts, especially on vulnerable communities.

Mitigation Measures

Outlined in four categories:

1.     Avoidance – prevent impacts through design/location choices.

2.     Minimization – reduce impacts via alternatives.

3.     Rehabilitation – restore affected environments.

4.     Offsetting – compensate for unavoidable impacts.

Roles and Responsibilities

• EAPs: Identify climate risks, manage assessments, and ensure stakeholder engagement.
• Specialists: Conduct assessments, provide objective input, and recommend mitigation.
• Applicants: Budget for assessments, provide accurate data, and consider alternatives.
• Authorities: Review applications, ensure compliance, and may request additional assessments.

Significance Rating Framework

Includes detailed tables to evaluate:

• Severity and duration of impacts.
• Probability and reversibility.
• Residual risks post-mitigation.
• Positive and negative significance levels.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

National Environmental Management Act: National Guideline for consideration of Climate Change Implications in applications for Environmental Authorisations, Atmospheric Emission Licenses and Waste Management Licenses: Comments invited

G 53574 GoN 6759

– Comment by 24 Nov 2025

24 October 2025

53574gon6759.pdf

ACTION

Ensure that you submit your comments before 24 November 2025.

FINANCE

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Income Tax Act:

Further information required for purposes of receipt

G 53574 GoN 6761

24 October 2025

APPLIES TO: 

Public Benefit Organizations (PBOs) approved under Section 18A.

Non-profit organisations (NPOs) that qualify for tax-deductible donations.

Educational institutions, healthcare providers, and welfare organisations that are registered and approved to issue Section 18A receipts.

Environmental, conservation, and animal welfare organisations with Section 18A status.

Government entities or departments that receive donations and issue Section 18A receipts.

SUMMED UP

Purpose of the Notice

To prescribe additional information that must be included on receipts issued under Section 18A(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1962 for tax-deductible donations.

Effective Date

• 1 March 2026
• This notice replaces the previous one (Notice No. 3082, Gazette No. 48104, dated 24 February 2023).

New Receipt Requirements

Receipts must now include:

1. Donor Information

• Type of person (natural, company, trust, etc.)
• ID type and country (for individuals)
• Registration number (for entities)
• Trading name (if different)
• Income tax reference number
• Contact number
• Email address

2. Donations in Kind

• Accurate description of the donated property
• Deemed value of the donation (as per Section 18A(3) or (3A))

3. Receipt Details

• A unique receipt number

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Income Tax Act: Further information required for purposes of receipt

G 53574 GoN 6761

24 October 2025

53574gon6761.pdf

ACTION

These organisations must update their donation receipts to include additional donor and donation details starting 1 March 2026, as prescribed in the new notice. This replaces the previous requirements published in Notice No. 3082 (Government Gazette No. 48104, 24 February 2023).

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Accounting Standards Board:

Exposure Draft 215 and Exposure Draft 216: Comments invited

G 53574 BN 840

– Comment by 13 Feb 2026

24 October 2025

APPLIES TO: 

Public Sector Entities

These are the primary focus of the amendments and include:

1.     National and Provincial Departments

o   Entities that delegate or receive delegated responsibilities through legislation or formal agreements.

o   Example: A provincial department of transport delegating vehicle license fee collection to municipalities.

2.     Municipalities

o   Often act as agents for provincial or national departments in delivering services or collecting revenue.

o   Example: Municipalities collecting motor vehicle license fees or managing housing projects on behalf of provincial departments.

3.     Public Entities and Agencies

o   Entities established by legislation to carry out specific functions, such as regulatory bodies or service delivery agencies.

o   Example: A public entity managing pension disbursements or issuing licenses on behalf of a department.

4.     Revenue Authorities

o   Entities like tax collection agencies that act on behalf of the state to collect taxes and other statutory receivables.

5.     Entities Managing Statutory Receivables

o   Those involved in collecting or managing receivables that arise from legislation, such as fines, levies, or taxes.

Entities Engaged in Principal-Agent Arrangements

Any organisation that:

• Acts on behalf of another entity to transact with third parties.
• Receives or disburses resources (cash, goods, or services) on behalf of another entity.
• Operates under a binding arrangement (contract, legislation, or regulation) that defines roles and responsibilities.

Key Implications for Affected Entities

• Assessment Requirements: Entities must assess whether they are acting as a principal or agent for each transaction or group of similar transactions.
• Recognition and Disclosure: Depending on their role, entities will have different requirements for recognizing revenue, expenses, assets, and liabilities.

• Judgement and Documentation: Significant judgement is required to determine the nature of arrangements, and entities must disclose these judgements in their financial statements.
• Reassessment: Changes in binding arrangements may require reassessment of the principal-agent relationship.

SUMMED UP

ED 215 – EXPOSURE DRAFT OF AMENDMENTS TO GRAP 109: ACCOUNTING BY PRINCIPALS AND AGENTS

This document proposes amendments to the Standard of GRAP 109, focusing on clarifying and enhancing the guidance for identifying and accounting for principal–agent arrangements in the public sector.

Key Highlights:

• Objective: To help entities determine whether they are acting as a principal or an agent in transactions involving third parties.

• Scope: Applies to entities preparing financial statements on the accrual basis under GRAP.

• Definitions:
  • A principal directs another entity to transact on its behalf and benefits from the results.
  • An agent acts on behalf of a principal under a binding arrangement.

• Binding Arrangements: Can arise from contracts, legislation, or past practices that create enforceable rights and obligations.

• Assessment Criteria:
  • Whether the entity has the power to determine significant terms of the transaction.
  • Whether it can use the resulting resources.
  • Whether it is exposed to variability in the transaction outcomes.

• Accounting Treatment:
  • Principals recognize all revenues, expenses, assets, and liabilities.
  • Agents recognize only the portion of revenue/expenses related to their role.

• Disclosure Requirements:
  • Nature of arrangements.
  • Judgements made in classification.
  • Resources held or liabilities incurred on behalf of principals.

• Illustrative Examples: Include housing projects, revenue collection, and grant disbursements to clarify application.

ED 216 – ATTACHMENT A: MATTERS CONSIDERED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE EXPOSURE DRAFT ON IMPROVEMENTS TO THE STANDARDS OF GRAP (2026)

This document outlines the rationale and decisions behind proposed improvements to various GRAP standards, aligning them with updates from IPSAS and IFRS.

Structure:

• Part A – Improvements to IPSAS:
  • Summarizes changes to IPSAS and their impact on GRAP.
  • Some IPSAS changes (e.g., hedging, lease modifications) are not adopted due to differences in GRAP or pending projects.

• • Key updates proposed for GRAP include:
    • GRAP 1: Classification of liabilities.
    • GRAP 19: Collective and individual services.
    • GRAP 17: Infrastructure asset guidance.
    • GRAP 4: Foreign exchange rates (lack of exchangeability).

• Part B – Improvements to IFRS:
  • Reviews IFRS amendments and their relevance to GRAP.
  • Some changes (e.g., hedge accounting, lease derecognition) are deferred for future projects.

• Part C – Stakeholder Feedback:
  • Incorporates editorial and technical corrections based on stakeholder input.
  • Examples include clarifications in GRAP 3, GRAP 20, GRAP 104, and GRAP 108.

• Part D – IFRIC Agenda Decisions:
  • Evaluates IFRIC decisions for potential GRAP impact.
  • No immediate changes proposed, but some topics are flagged for future consideration.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

BOARD NOTICE 840 OF 2025

INVITATION TO COMMENT ON

EXPOSURE DRAFT 215 AND

EXPOSURE DRAFT 216 ISSUED BY THE ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARD

Issued: 24 October 2025

The Accounting Standards Board (the Board) invites comment on Proposed Amendments to the Standard of GRAP on Accounting by Principals and Agents (GRAP 109) (ED 215) and Improvements to the Standards of GRAP, 2026 (ED 216).

Comment is due as follows:

– ED 215 by 13 February 2026.

– ED 216 by 9 January 2026.

The purpose of ED 215 is to clarify the existing requirements in GRAP 109 to identify whether an arrangement meets the definition of a principal-agent arrangement. ED 215 seeks comment from stakeholders on whether the proposed amendments are useful.

The purpose of ED 216 is to propose improvements to the Standards of GRAP. ED 216 seeks comments from stakeholders on these proposed improvements.

Responses to the Exposure Drafts should be received by the respective comment deadlines, as indicated above.

Copies of the documents

The documents are available electronically on the Board’s website – http://www.asb.co.za, or can be obtained by contacting the Board’s offices on 011 697 0660 (telephone), or info@asb.co.za (email).

Comment on the Exposure Drafts can be emailed to info@asb.co.za.

We look forward to receiving your responses.

Proposed Exposure Draft on Amendments to GRAP 109 – Accounting by principals and Agents

Improvements to the Standards of GRAP (2026)

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Accounting Standards Board: Exposure Draft 215 and Exposure Draft 216: Comments invited

G 53574 BN 840

– Comment by 13 Feb 2026

24 October 2025

53574bn840.pdf

ACTION

Ensure that you submit your comments before

– ED 215 by 13 February 2026.

– ED 216 by 9 January 2026.

LABOUR

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Labour Relations Act: Various Collective Agreements

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Labour Relations Act: Bargaining Council for the Civil Engineering Industry: Extension to non-parties of the Wage and Task Grade Collective Agreement: Representation invited

G 53566 RG 11989 GoN 6750

– Comment by 12 Nov 2025

21 October 2025

53566rg11989gon6750.pdf

Labour Relations Act: Bargaining Council for the Civil Engineering Industry: Extension to non-parties of the Wage and Task Grade Collective Agreement: Representation invited

G 53565 RG 11897 GoN 6749

– Comment by 12 Nov 2025

20 October 2025

53565rg11897gon6749.pdf

Labour Relations Act: Withdrawal of notice published in respect of the application for the registration of an Amalgamating Bargaining Coucil: National Bargaining Council for the Restaurant, Catering and Allied Trades

G 53514 RG 11895 GoN 6730

17 October 2025

53514rg11895gon6731.pdf

Labour Relations Act: Application for registration of an Amalgamation Bargaining Council

G 53514 RG 11895 GoN 6730

17 October 2025

53514rg11895gon6730.pdf

Labour Relations Act: Registration of employers’ organisation: Agricultural Allied Industries Association (AAIA) (

G 53572 RG 11899 GoN 6751

24 October 2025

53572rg11899gon6751.pdf

Labour Relations Act: Variation of scope of Bargaining Council for the Furniture Manufacturing Industry KwaZulu-Natal

G 53574 GoN 6758

24 October 2025

53574gon6758.pdf

MEDICAL

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

National Health Act:

National Environmental Health norms and standards

G 53515 GoN 6740

17 October 2025

APPLIES TO: 

Any organisation or facility that:

• Provides services to the public,
• Handles food, water, waste, or chemicals,
• Houses vulnerable populations (children, elderly, mentally ill),
• Operates in public health-sensitive environments (e.g., borders, healthcare),
• Or is involved in environmental health service delivery,

…will be affected by these updated norms and standards.

SUMMED UP

Purpose of the Notice

The notice replaces the 2015 Environmental Health Norms and Standards and introduces updated National Environmental Health Norms and Standards. These aim to:

• Strengthen environmental health services.
• Improve public health through better water, sanitation, waste, and food safety management.
• Standardize service delivery across all levels of government and sectors.

Who Must Comply

The standards apply to:

• Government entities (national, provincial, municipal).
• Health facilities (public and private).
• Educational institutions, childcare centres, old age homes, prisons, accommodation establishments, beauty parlours, public gathering venues, construction sites, points of entry, and more.
• Businesses handling food, hazardous substances, or waste.

Key Compliance Areas

1.     Organizational Systems:

o   Planning, communication, HR, training, and record management.

o   Monitoring and enforcement by Environmental Health Practitioners (EHPs).

2.     Monitoring Standards:

o   For food safety, water quality, waste management, vector control, pollution, hazardous substances, and communicable diseases.

3.     Premises Standards:

o   Specific requirements for different types of premises (e.g., schools, clinics, swimming pools, tattoo parlours, etc.).

o   Covers structural safety, hygiene, sanitation, medical care, and waste handling.

Legal Implications

• Non-compliance may result in legal action against the owner, occupier, or person in charge of a premises.
• EHPs are empowered to enforce these standards and issue compliance notices.

Overall Goal

To ensure safe, healthy environments where people live, work, learn, and receive care—thereby reducing the burden of disease and promoting public health.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

National Health Act: National Environmental Health norms and standards

G 53515 GoN 6740

17 October 2025

53515gon6740.pdf

ACTION

1. Legal and Administrative Compliance

• Obtain and display valid Certificates of Acceptability (for food premises, health establishments, etc.).
• Ensure permits or licenses are in place for activities such as keeping animals, operating caravan parks, or running offensive trades.
• Maintain inspection records, complaint logs, and compliance notices.
• Cooperate with environmental health practitioners (EHPs) during inspections and enforcement.

2. Infrastructure and Facility Standards

• Ensure structural integrity and hygiene of buildings (e.g., smooth, cleanable surfaces, proper ventilation, lighting, and drainage).

• Provide adequate water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) facilities, including:
  • Potable water supply.
  • Gender-separated toilets and handwashing stations.
  • Facilities for menstrual hygiene management.

• Maintain waste management systems, including:
  • Segregation of general and hazardous waste.
  • Proper storage, collection, and disposal.
  • Contracts with licensed waste disposal providers.

3. Health and Safety Measures

• Implement infection prevention and control protocols.
• Provide first aid kits, emergency contact lists, and trained personnel.
• Ensure vector control (e.g., rodent-proofing, pest control).
• Monitor indoor air quality, especially in health and accommodation facilities.
• Maintain laundry services and proper linen handling procedures.

4. Monitoring and Reporting

• Conduct regular inspections based on risk profiles (e.g., monthly for health establishments, quarterly for childcare centres).

• Maintain databases for:
  • Food premises.
  • Hazardous substances dealers.
  • Paint and chemical retailers.
  • Complaints and legal actions.

• Submit environmental health data to the District Health Information System (DHIS).
• Investigate and report foodborne or communicable disease outbreaks within 24 hours.

5. Training and Human Resources

• Employ qualified environmental health practitioners (1 per 10,000 population).
• Provide ongoing training and CPD for staff.
• Ensure staff identification (name tags, uniforms).
• Conduct annual staff satisfaction surveys and use results for improvement.

6. Environmental and Public Health Planning

• Develop and implement:
  • Food safety monitoring plans.
  • Water quality monitoring plans.
  • Vector control and pollution control plans.
  • Climate change and health adaptation plans.
  • Emergency contingency plans (especially at points of entry).

7. Special Requirements for Specific Premises

• Childcare centres, schools, old age homes, prisons, and health facilities must meet detailed standards for:
  • Space per occupant.
  • Medical care access.
  • Food preparation and storage.
  • Waste and laundry management.

• Public gathering places must have:
  • Adequate ablution facilities.
  • Waste management during events.
  • Access to potable water.

8. Points of Entry and Conveyances

• Inspect ships, aircraft, and vehicles on arrival.
• Monitor travellers for communicable diseases.
• Maintain quarantine and isolation protocols.
• Ensure waste and water management on conveyances meet international standards (e.g., WHO, IHR 2005).

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

National Health Act:

Call for nominations: Members of the Board: Office of Health Standards Compliance: Comments invited

G 53525 GoN 6747

– Comment by 07 Nov 2025

17 October 2025

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

National Health Act: Call for nominations: Members of the Board: Office of Health Standards Compliance: Comments invited

G 53525 GoN 6747

– Comment by 07 Nov 2025

17 October 2025

53525gon6747.pdf

ACTION

Ensure that you submit your comments by 07 November 2025.

PUBLIC PROCUREMENT

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Public Procurement Amendment Bill:

Notice of Intention to Introduce Private Member’s Bill into Parliament: Comments invited

G 53515 GeN 3559

– Comment by 16 Nov 2025

17 October 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1. Organs of State and Public Institutions

These include:

• National and provincial government departments
• Municipalities
• State-owned enterprises (SOEs)
• Public entities and agencies

These bodies are directly responsible for implementing procurement policies and would need to revise their frameworks to align with the proposed amendments, especially the shift toward Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and away from BBBEE-based preferences.

2. Private Sector Companies Contracting with Government

Especially:

• Suppliers, service providers, and contractors bidding for public tenders
• Large corporations currently structured to meet BBBEE requirements
• Businesses involved in subcontracting or asset transfers to meet race-based procurement targets

These companies would need to adapt to a race-neutral, SDG-aligned procurement framework, which may significantly alter how they qualify for and win government contracts.

3. BBBEE-Compliant Enterprises

• Companies that have invested heavily in BBBEE compliance (e.g., through ownership structures, partnerships, or shareholding arrangements)
• BBBEE verification agencies and consultants

The proposed repeal of the BBBEE Act would directly affect these entities, potentially rendering their compliance efforts obsolete under the new framework.

4. Legal and Regulatory Bodies

• The Public Procurement Tribunal, whose member qualification criteria are proposed to be expanded
• Institutions involved in oversight, enforcement, and dispute resolution in procurement matters

5. Civil Society and Advocacy Groups

• Organizations focused on economic inclusion, anti-corruption, and social justice
• Groups advocating for or against race-based policies in public procurement

They may engage in public discourse or submit representations regarding the Bill.

SUMMED UP

Purpose of the Bill

• To amend the Public Procurement Act, 2024.
• To shift public procurement policy from race-based preferential systems (BBBEE) to a race-neutral, SDG-aligned framework.
• To address systemic inequality and improve socio-economic outcomes for the majority of South Africans.

Key Changes Proposed

1.     Repeal of BBBEE Act (2003):

o   Ends race-based procurement preferences.

o   Removes BBBEE as a basis for awarding government contracts.

2.     SDG-Based Procurement Framework:

o   Public procurement policies must align with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

o   Focuses on measurable, inclusive socio-economic development.

3.     Removal of Preferential Procurement Mechanisms:

o   Eliminates:

§  Set-asides

§  Prequalification criteria

§  Subcontracting requirements

§  Sector designations for local content

4.     Changes to the Public Procurement Tribunal:

o   Expands qualification criteria for tribunal members.

o   Removes “national security” as a blanket exemption for procurement rules.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Public Procurement Amendment Bill: Notice of Intention to Introduce Private Member’s Bill into Parliament: Comments invited

G 53515 GeN 3559

– Comment by 16 Nov 2025

17 October 2025

53515gen3559.pdf

ACTION

Ensure that you submit your comments before 16 November 2025.

TRANSPORTATION

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

ROAD CARRIER PERMITS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Transportation 53567 24-10-2025 RoadCarrier

TRANSPORTATION: 53513 17-10-2025 RoadCarrier

AGRICULTURAL ARTICLES

SOUTH AFRICA

The importance of DFI funding to support sustainable agriculture: A banking perspective

Projects  in Africa (notably in the Agri-space) struggle to reach financial close and scale not because of a lack of demand or technical promise, but because the risk‑return equation is misaligned for purely commercial capital. Development finance institutions (“DFIs) are uniquely positioned to bridge this gap. In a G20 context that prioritises food security, DFI capital, deployed intelligently alongside private finance, can accelerate progress towards securing food security.

Sustainable agriculture requires long-term capital across entire value chains. Upstream, farmers and aggregators need working capital and input financing that matches seasonal cash flows. Midstream players require investment in storage, cold chain, processing and logistics to reduce post‑harvest losses and improve quality. Downstream, off‑takers need liquidity to honour purchase commitments and to introduce traceability, certification and data systems demanded by export markets. Layered on top are adaptation and mitigation investments – soil health, water stewardship, regenerative practices, energy on farms and climate risk analytics – that do not  always fit neatly into conventional working capital lines. This is where DFIs can make a material difference.

The first contribution DFIs may bring is de‑risking private capital. Guarantees, first‑loss tranches and risk‑sharing facilities allow commercial banks to extend credit to thinly capitalised counterparties without breaching internal risk appetites. When well-structured, these instruments can be catalytic, phasing-out as markets mature while guiding borrowers toward stronger corporate and ESG governance and reporting practices. In practice, blended facilities combine senior commercial tranches with concessional layers, often targeted at adaptation or inclusion outcomes, particularly for smallholders and/or women‑owned enterprises.

The second contribution is tenor and currency. Sustainable Agri infrastructure, irrigation, storage, land preparation and farm acquisition, infrastructure financing (e.g., packing facilities), renewable energy generation and precision agriculture often requires financing beyond the comfort of local banks’ shorter-term maturities. DFIs can extend longer tenors, with generous capital grace periods. Local currency is equally important. Where foreign exchange risk cannot be feasibly hedged at project level, DFI local‑currency lending or synthetic structures using cross‑currency swaps reduce the volatility that has undermined many promising Agri ventures. We have advised on a plethora of local currency loans across the continent, from XOF to Birr, supporting everything from onion farming in Senegal to chicken rearing in Ethiopia.

Third is standards and technical assistance. DFI involvement typically brings environmental and social safeguards, climate resilience assessments and corporate governance enhancements aligned to international benchmarks. Rather than a compliance burden, these uplift bankability: better land‑use due diligence, community engagement, labour practices and biodiversity and water protections reduce dispute risk and local community tensions, improve yield stability and unlock premium markets. Embedded technical assistance can fund agronomy support, MRV systems for climate outcomes and product traceability systems for export markets (e.g., cacoa beans) – investments that can struggle to fit within commercial bank debt requirements.

Structuring choices matter. We have advised on sustainability‑linked loans in the agricultural sector, creating a direct line between pricing and measurable outcomes such as yield stability, water‑use efficiency, soil organic carbon or deforestation‑free sourcing – as well as on the  calibration of key performance indicators and verification protocols, all of which are critical for long-term sustainable growth.

In short, the DFI capital in many senses sets up the farm, which in turn anchor the value chains in which it participates both directly and indirectly. This leads to working capital financing solutions (which may be provided by the DFI at inception or indeed by commercial banks through self-liquidating trade finance structures where balance sheet strength of the borrower is still lacking), by way of warehouse receipt finance and collateral management facility solutions -anchored by credible operators and possibly even supported by partial guarantees. Receivables financing and factoring solutions may then come in at the back end of the value chain, further freeing up working capital, at competitive pricing.

Concerning smallholders, credit programmes that rely on traditional collateral alone will miss the majority of producers. Africa experiences challenges in terms of the underlying proprietary rights of land ownership (often traditional or customary law applies), which presents challenges in this legal respect but also inhibits traditional economies of scale achieved on larger-scale commercial farms. DFI, often supported by blended finance, can align to inclusive business models – outgrower schemes, input advances  digital credit scoring using agronomic and mobile data, and shared asset platforms – offers a pathway to scale.

Execution risk remains a challenge. Delays to financial close are experienced in the implementation of an Environmental, Social, and Governance-linked action plan steps and remediation measures, refinancing existing creditors that came before, and in taking and perfecting collateral (the costs and expenses in implementing transactions can also be significant). In some jurisdictions, collateral registries have been established but remain inoperative, causing uncertainty as to security status and priority.

The opportunities are great: Africa’s food demand is rising, climate pressures are intensifying and global buyers ever more stringent on sustainability requirements.

Our hope is that South Africa’s presidency of the G20 will place a strong emphasis on these opportunities in the African Agri-space with a view to encouraging and catalysing the implementation of effective policies in the real economies of Africa to  attract DFI capital where it is needed most, and to aid domestic food security and open export markets.

Craig Saven

ENSafrica

B-BBEE ARTICLES

SOUTH AFRICA

DA targets end to BBBEE and race-based tenders

MP plans bill that uses sustainable development goals as the basis for procurement

The DA is seeking to do away with the Broad-Based BEE (BBBEE) Act and free public tenders from “race-based procurement” in a move that is likely to pit it against its key partner in the government of national unity (GNU), the ANC, which has championed affirmative action policies to redress the injustices of the past.

DA MP and head of policy Mathew Cuth­bert will soon introduce a private member’s bill in the national legislature, looking to overhaul the public procurement regime, which he says has benefited a few politically connected tenderpreneurs.

The draft bill also looks to make consequential amendments to the yet-to-be-in-force Public Procurement Act of 2024.

In the explanatory summary of the bill, which the public can comment on, Cuthbert said the current race-based procurement policies had failed to make SA a more just society.

“Race-based preferences have failed to bring about socio-economic change to the majority of South Africans. Instead, these policies favour the implementation of often complicated asset sales, subcontracting allocations and share transfers among large corporate entities to comply with the complex race-based procurement targets, thereby qualifying for lucrative government contracts,” Cuthbert said.

“BBBEE has proven to be an ineffective method of promoting economic inclusion, as it is rooted in the idea of ‘trickle-down redress’, where corporates are used to transfer assets, positions and contracts from one elite person to another to promote economic inclusion.

“However, those who currently benefit most from BBBEE tend to be either politically connected, already wealthy or highly educated persons. Therefore, the vast majority of South Africans, who are intended to benefit from this policy, are excluded from its ambit.”

Responsibility

Partners in the GNU, the DA and the ANC have stuck to their guns in terms of policy and messaging for their respective bases, with the parties not on the same page on several key economic policies, including land, industrial policy and National Health Insurance.

One of the departments the DA unsuccessfully negotiated hard to have responsibility over after last year’s general election produced a GNU was trade, industry & competition, which is not only responsible for industrial policy but BEE policies as well.

The ANC stood its ground, with President Cyril Ramaphosa tapping Parks Tau to lead the key department. However, the DA got one of the inconsequential roles of deputy minister in the form of Andrew Whitfield, who was fired in June.

BBBEE has proven to be an ineffective method of promoting economic inclusion, as it is rooted in ‘trickle-down redress’, where corporates are used to transfer assets, positions and contracts from one elite person to another

DA MP and head of policy for supposedly undertaking a trip to the US without the permission of the president.

The fallout from the firing of Whitfield, who served alongside ANC MP and head of its economic transformation committee Zuko Godlimpi as a deputy minister in the department, saw the DA pull out of the national dialogue in protest.

Race neutral

BBBEE is a legislatively mandated and regulated system of laws and policies aimed at promoting black empowerment in SA and thereby addressing the exclusion of the majority of black South Africans from effectively participating in the formal economy under apartheid. The primary enabling legislation is the BBBEE Act 53 of 2003.

Cuthbert’s draft bill proposes to amend the Public Procurement Act to include provisions for procuring institutions to incorporate the UN’s sustainable development goals as the basis for an “objectively measured, race-neutral and socioeconomically progressive alternative procurement framework”, arguing this aligns with the constitution.

“The draft bill further proposes the repeal of the provisions of the principal act [Public Procurement Act] related to set-asides, pre-qualification criteria for preferential procurement, subcontracting as a condition to bid, and the designation of sectors for local production and content.

“The draft bill further seeks to repeal the BBBEE Act and proposes the necessary consequential amendments to other related legislation which will be affected by the repeal of the BBBEE Act.”

Ramaphosa signed the Public Procurement Act into law in July 2024. However, it is not yet in force, as regulations still have to be promulgated.

The DA-run Western Cape government has asked the Constitutional Court to set aside the Public Procurement Act, saying it will harm service delivery.

The policy outlines a scorecard that promotes non white ownership, management, procurement and capacity building to “push” out the apartheid legacy. However, more than 20 years since BBBEE was put into place, there is still much to be desired in the empowerment of the historically marginalized, and this is seen in the high levels of inequality in the country.

By Kabelo Khumalo

Business Day

BEE here to stay – Ramaphosa

A day after the GNU’s second-largest partner, the DA, launched its Economic Inclusion for All Bill, to replace the ANC’s BEE policy, President Cyril Ramphosa has still not seen it, reports News24.

Ramaphosa underscored the importance of adhering to proper parliamentary processes for legislative changes. ‘Currently, we have a BEE policy that is rooted and underpinned by our Constitution and the laws that we have passed. So, if anyone wants an amendment to BEE legislation, they must table their proposals and they must be taken for discussion in Parliament. He said at the moment, BEE policies, legislation and regulations, as they stand, apply without any dilution whatsoever. ‘We will continue to insist that the BEE process of transforming our economy is the correct approach that we have crafted to make sure that participation in the economy of our country is inclusive because hitherto, it has not been inclusive.

It’s been exclusive.’ Ramaphosa said the law had been relegated by those who benefitted through privilege and many other processes from the economy, which was skewed and only made to benefit a few white people.

Through its Bill, the DA wants to amend parts of the Public Procurement Amendment Act of 2024, ‘to repeal all race-based preferential procurement provisions and replace them with a real empowerment system that targets poverty as the proxy for disadvantage instead of race’.

Full News24 report

FINANCE ARTICLES

SOUTH AFRICA

FSCA fines Harith General Partners R1.7 million for Fica non-compliance

Fica compliance is something companies ignore at their peril as the FSCA will see if they do not comply and fine them.

The FSCA has fined Harith General Partners R1.7 million for not complying with certain provisions of Fica.

The company had no risk management and compliance programme and failed to conduct proper due diligence on customers.

The Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) imposed the administrative penalty on Harith General Partners for failing to comply with certain provisions of the Financial Intelligence Centre Act (Fica).

Harith is a licensed financial services provider (FSP) under the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act (Fais Act) and an accountable institution under Fica.

The FSCA is responsible for supervising and enforcing FSP compliance with Fica that aims to combat money laundering, the financing of terrorism and other related criminal activities. All accountable institutions designated under Fica must comply fully with its requirements.

FSCA says Harith did not have a risk management and compliance programme as Fica requires

When the FSCA conducted an inspection on Harith as part of its ongoing supervisory activities in terms of section 45B of Fica, it found that Harith was in breach of these sections of Fica:

• Sections 42(1) and 42(2): Accountable institutions must develop, document, maintain and implement a risk management and compliance programme (RMCP) for anti-money laundering, counter-terrorist financing and proliferation financing.

The RMCP must outline how the accountable institution will determine when a transaction or activity is reportable to the Financial Intelligence Centre (FIC) and provide for the processes for reporting the information to the FIC.

The RMCP must also indicate how the accountable institution will comply with the provisions of section 26B of Fica relating to prohibitions of persons and entities identified by the United Nations Security Council.

Although Harith had developed an RMCP, it was found to be deficient in that the RMCP failed to outline how the accountable institution would comply with Fica.

Sections 21, 21A and 21B: Accountable institutions are required to conduct customer due diligence which includes the identification and verification of clients, establishing the identity of people acting on behalf of the client, obtaining information on the nature of the business relationship and obtaining beneficial ownership information.

Harith failed to conduct the requisite customer due diligence because it:

• Failed to establish and verify the identity of clients and provide evidence of establishing and verifying the identity of other people authorised to act on behalf of clients.
  • Failed to obtain information describing the client’s nature of business, intended purpose of the business relationship and source of funds.
  • Failed to adequately establish and verify the identity of beneficial owners.

Harith did not screen clients and employees as Fica requires, according to FSCA

• Section 28A read with section 26B: Accountable institutions are required to scrutinise their client information to determine if any of their clients are listed on terrorism financing lists. Harith failed to provide evidence that client information was scrutinised against the UN lists published under the Protection of Constitutional Democracy Against Terrorist and Related Activities Act, as required.
• Directive 8: An accountable institution is required to screen prospective employees and current employees for competence and integrity periodically in a risk-based manner. Moreover, it must provide for and record the manner of screening for competence and integrity, as well as the manner for scrutinising of employee information against terrorism financing lists, will be conducted.

Harith failed to provide evidence that employees were subject to competence and integrity screening.

FSCA says fine is a reminder it will not tolerate non-compliance with Fica

Considering these contraventions and based on an assessment of various factors, including the size, complexity and risk exposure applicable to Harith, the FSCA issued a directive to the institution to remedy the identified deficiencies and imposed a financial penalty of R1.7 million.

However, R500 000 is conditionally suspended for two years. The FSCA says it also notes Harith’s ongoing engagements regarding its efforts to remediate the identified instances of non-compliance.

The FSCA says it considers the identified compliance deficiencies to be serious breaches of Fica. “An effective RMCP is vital not only because it assists accountable institutions to protect and maintain the integrity of their own businesses but also because it helps contribute to the integrity of the South African financial system as a whole.

“Proper due diligence of clients and screening of client and employees against the terrorism financing lists is crucial to help identify and mitigate against suspicious and criminal elements from infiltrating the financial system.”

The FSCA says this fine serves as a reminder that the FSCA will not tolerate non-compliance with Fica.

“The authority urges all accountable institutions to continually review and enhance their anti-money laundering and terrorist financing controls at the highest levels and conduct thorough risk assessments on a regular basis. Failure to do so will result in firm regulatory action.”

By Ina Opperman

The Citizen

Warning to retailers that charge customers extra when paying with bank card

Businesses that add a surcharge are in breach of Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act.

The consumer goods and services ombud (CGSO) has warned store owners that add a surcharge when customers choose to pay using a bank card, instead of cash.

This often happens with informal businesses. For example, if a customer buys goods worth R80, the vendor might add R10 because the customer is paying with a card. Vendors usually say the extra charge covers their bank fees.

However, the Ombudsman said this is against the law, and anyone who adds a surcharge because a customer pays using card can be fined.

Contravention on the Consumer act

CGSO is an independent body in South Africa that protects shoppers by resolving complaints between consumers and businesses in the consumer goods and services industry. The Consumer Protection Act (CPA) protect consumers, by ensuring businesses treat customers fairly and honestly.

The Ombudsman told The Citizen that businesses that add a surcharge are in breach of Section 23 of the CPA. Section 23 of the Act protects consumers from being overcharged or misled about prices.

The section outlines that businesses can’t charge more than the displayed price. In addition, all products must have a clearly displayed price so customers know what they’re paying, and if two different prices are shown, the lower price must be charged.

“If the supplier is found to have breached S23 of the CPA which relates to pricing this will be considered as prohibited conduct. Should the complaint be referred by the National Consumer Commission (NCC) to the National Consumer Tribunal (NCT), the supplier could face a fine in terms of section 112 of the CPA,” said the Ombudsman.

Education is key

The NCC is an independent body that ensures businesses obey the CPA. It will investigate the complaint, take action based on findings or refer the case to the NCT. The Tribunal is like a court for consumers, it will hear the case and issue a ruling.

When asked what measures have been put in place to ensure businesses do not contravene the act, the Ombudsman said most businesses need to be educated so that they understand the law.

“The CPA and related as consumer protection legislation serves this purpose, however education is key so that suppliers understand what is expected and what consequences await those who do not comply,” it said.

Consumers must not pay

The Ombudsman added that shoppers who find themselves in a situation where they are asked to buy a surcharge must not proceed with the transaction and must report the business to the Payment Association of South Africa (PASA).

It said consumers must “cite Section 23 of the CPA as a consumer is expected to pay the displayed price and cannot be penalized for choosing an alternative method of payment. Do not proceed with transaction.”

“Consumers who encounter this behaviour may report the supplier to the PASA.” The association is responsible for overseeing payment systems in the country.

By Tshehla Cornelius Koteli

The Citizen

Optimism that SA is on cusp of exiting greylisting

There is optimism in the markets that the greylisting of SA by international watchdog the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) will be lifted on Friday at the conclusion of the FATF plenary in Paris.

SA’s international reputation as a well-regulated financial and economic centre hinges on the outcome of the critical decision, which, if positive, will be a boost to investor confidence.

FATF sets standards for combatting money laundering and financing extremism, and evaluates the regimes countries have in place for this.

Prescient Investment Management chief investment officer Bastian Teichgreeber was confident that the greylisting, imposed in February 2023, would be lifted as SA had implemented all the 22 actions required by FATF.

He said the markets — which were always forward-looking and sentiment-driven — had already priced in a lifting of the greylisting, though he cautioned that greylisting was a very small factor driving the markets.

“It is pretty much rubberstamping, as SA has ticked all the 22 requirements. There is no reason to believe that SA will not come off the list,” Teichgreeber said.

SA was placed on FATF’s greylist in February 2023, which had immediate consequences in terms of investor confidence, heightening due diligence, especially in the financial sector, adding to the cost of doing business and making cross-border correspondent banking relationships more onerous.

All this would improve, Teichgreeber said, with the lifting of the greylisting. He also pointed out that countries on the greylist for a longer time generally suffered significantly fewer capital inflows from foreign investors, with the International Monetary Fund estimating this to be roughly 7.5% of GDP less.

“Our coming off the greylist eliminates that worry,” he said, cautioning that SA’s removal from the greylist was just one of the factors affecting capital inflows.

Another positive was the removal of regulatory uncertainty over what further measures were possibly in the pipeline to meet FATF requirements.

The June FATF plenary noted the progress that SA had made in meeting FATF requirements, saying it had substantially completed all the 22 actions in the action plan that was adopted when SA was greylisted.

FATF decided that this progress warranted an onsite assessment by the FATF Africa Joint Group to verify that the anti-money-laundering and combatting the financing of terrorism reforms had been implemented.

It also wanted to assess whether the necessary political commitment remained in place to sustain the progress made. The government assured an FATF delegation earlier this year of its political commitment to continue improving SA’s regime.

The FATF Africa Joint Group was due to submit a report with recommendations to this week’s plenary.

SA did not manage to satisfy FATF at its February plenary largely due to the lack of successful prosecutions of high-profile cases but the Treasury was confident at the time that SA would exit the greylist this month. There were only two outstanding items, which the FATF said had been partly but not fully addressed.

The greylisting galvanised the government to address the compliance deficiencies. Multi-agency task teams were set up to address the FATF findings, an action plan was drawn up, laws were amended, supervision tightened and greater focus given to the prosecution of money-laundering and terrorism financing cases.

The law regarding the identification and tracking of the beneficial ownership of companies and trusts was tighented and the supervision of designated non-financial businesses and professions such as estate agents and lawyers was strengthened.

Linda Ensor

Business Day

LAND AND PROPERTY ARTICLES

SOUTH AFRICA

Cyril Ramaphosa admits Expropriation Act is unconstitutional

President Cyril Ramaphosa has admitted under oath that Sections 19(2), (3) and (4) of the new Expropriation Act are unconstitutional.

This is because they “in error” provide that expropriation can take place before the landowner can challenge the matter in court.

Ramaphosa also admitted that these sections may “render the provisions void for vagueness” and contradict other sections of the Act.

This admission is contained in Ramaphosa’s answering affidavit in a court case about the Expropriation Act.

AfriForum and other parties are seeking to have the Expropriation Act declared unconstitutional in the Cape Town High Court.

In his affidavit, Ramaphosa asked the court to “remedy the unconstitutionality” of the article by “reading in” amendments to the articles.

In the replying affidavit, Kallie Kriel, CEO of AfriForum, welcomed Ramaphosa’s acknowledgement that parts of the Expropriation Act are unconstitutional.

However, Kriel argues that, due to the extent of the amendments proposed by Ramaphosa, the courts are not in a position to amend the legislation.

This is the task of parliament. Ramaphosa should have asked parliament to correct the unconstitutionalities before he signed the bill into law on 20 December 2024.

In Kriel’s affidavit, AfriForum argues that the court should declare the Expropriation Act unconstitutional in its entirety.

Alternatively, the unconstitutional parts thereof should be referred back to parliament to make amendments.

“Ramaphosa’s admissions confirm that he and the ANC have been telling lies by dismissing concerns about the unconstitutionality of the Expropriation Act,” Kriel said.

According to Kriel, Ramaphosa must be held personally responsible for the negative consequences of his signing of the Expropriation Act on the country.

“Within 10 days of Ramaphosa announcing that he had signed the Expropriation Act, President Donald Trump announced that he would be imposing punitive measures against South Africa,” he said.

“There is, therefore, a direct link between Ramaphosa’s reckless signing of the Expropriation Act and the US’s actions against South Africa.

“Any job losses and growing poverty that result from this must, therefore, be laid directly at the door of Ramaphosa and other ANC leaders.”

Expropriation Act unconstitutional

In a letter to Ramaphosa on 15 April 2024, AfriForum officially requested the President to refer the Expropriation Act back to parliament, as it was unconstitutional.

“Although the President knew that this Act was unconstitutional, he ignored the requests of AfriForum and others,” Kriel said.

“This was because he mistakenly thought that it would aid the ANC in regaining lost support in the election.”

“Ramaphosa was therefore prepared to sacrifice the interests of the country and its citizens for the sake of his own and the ANC’s party-political interests.”

Kriel maintained that Ramaphosa attempted to mislead the court in his affidavit by claiming that the Government Printing Works was closed over the festive season.

“Ramaphosa made this misrepresentation to try to justify why the Act, which he had already signed in secret on 20 December 2024,” he said.

The Expropriation Act was only published in the Government Gazette 35 days later, on 24 January 2025.

In terms of Section 80 of the Constitution, one-third of members of parliament can refer an Act to the Constitutional Court for review within 30 days of signing.

Ramaphosa’s secret signing of the Act therefore deprived members of parliament of this constitutional right.

Kriel expressed concern that Ramaphosa continued to argue that Section 12(3) of the Expropriation Act, which allows for expropriation without compensation, is not unconstitutional.

Kriel said AfriForum will fight the Expropriation Act in the interest of the country all the way to the highest court.

Businesstech

LEGISLATION ARTICLES

KENYA

A landmark shift in rights, compliance and inclusion with Kenya’s new Persons with Disabilities Act

The Persons with Disabilities Act 4 of 2025 (the PWD Act), which was assented to on 8 May 2025 and commenced on 27 May 2025, represents an overhaul of Kenya’s disability rights framework. The PWD Act gives effect to Article 54 of the Constitution of Kenya on the rights of persons with disabilities (PWDs) with an approach that has significant implications for every business operating in Kenya. The PWD Act repeals the Persons with Disabilities Act, 2003 (the Repealed Act).

At a glance

• The Persons with Disabilities Act 4 of 2025 (the PWD Act), which was assented to on 8 May 2025 and commenced on 27 May 2025, represents an overhaul of Kenya’s disability rights framework.
• The PWD Act requires immediate attention from all organisations operating in Kenya, as non-compliance carries severe penalties, while compliance offers both legal protection and significant financial incentives.
• Successful compliance requires a holistic approach that addresses employment practices, physical accessibility, service delivery, information provision, and staff training. The lack of guidance from regulators means early adopters will be navigating untested ground, facing both compliance costs and uncertainty over enforcement priorities.

The PWD Act restructures the National Council for Persons with Disabilities (the Council) and expands its functions and powers. To encourage compliance, the PWD Act introduces various incentives and reliefs. Conversely, it also provides for offences and penalties in cases of non-compliance. While ambitious, the PWD Act leaves open questions on how the new powers will be co-ordinated and whether the enforcement mechanism is sufficient to match the breadth of obligations it creates for employers and businesses. This article focuses on the effects of the PWD Act on private sector employers and businesses in Kenya.

Guiding values and principles

Unlike the Repealed Act, the PWD Act establishes fundamental laws that must be followed by all state organs, public officers and persons, including business associations and civil society organisations, emphasising the need for respect for the inherent dignity and individual autonomy, equality and non-discrimination, full and effective participation and inclusion in society, accessibility, and equality of opportunity of PWDs. These principles form the foundation for all obligations and rights established under the PWD Act, creating a framework that extends far beyond traditional disability accommodations.

While these values are important, they are framed broadly and may create uncertainty for employers on how to operationalise them in everyday workplace policies. Without clear benchmarks, businesses risk compliance gaps or over-investment in measures that may not be recognised by regulators.

Key obligations for employers

The PWD Act imposes various obligations on employers which were not previously substantively provided for in the Repealed Act. For instance, the PWD Act now imposes an express obligation on employers not to discriminate against a PWD in job application procedures, hiring, advancement and other terms, conditions and privileges of employment. Further, employers are required to take the measures outlined below

Employment quota of 5%

Where an employer has at least 20)employees, 5% of direct employment opportunities must be reserved for PWDs to secure employment. This is a bold inclusion measure but may be difficult for small and medium enterprises (SMEs), micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) or specialised industries to meet in practice. Additionally, the PWD Act does not provide for phased implementation or exemptions, exposing non-compliant firms to penalties even where qualified candidates may be scarce.

Policies

Employers need to formulate policies and programmes to promote basic human rights, improve working conditions, and enhance employment opportunities for PWDs. While this is a positive initiative, the challenge lies in the fact that the PWD Act does not prescribe minimum policy content, leaving employers to guess what will satisfy regulators and creating a risk of inconsistent enforcement across sectors.

Zero tolerance for discrimination

When recruiting, employers are not permitted to discriminate on account of disability. This aligns with constitutional equality guarantees. However, the PWD Act does not provide clear guidance on when it may be lawful to impose reasonable limitations e.g. in roles that require certain physical capabilities, such as emergency services or manual labour. This lack of clarity may give rise to disputes.

No disability testing

Employers may not conduct any test or examination to establish whether an applicant is a PWD or as to the nature or severity of a person’s disability This protects candidates from intrusive practices but may create tension where employers legitimately need medical fitness assessments for safety-sensitive roles. The PWD Act does not clarify this distinction.

Reasonable accommodation

Employers are required to carry out appropriate modifications in their work premises to accommodate the employment of PWDs. While consistent with international standards, the absence of financial support for all businesses (beyond the proposed tax incentives under the PWD Act) means that SMEs and MSMEs may face disproportionate compliance costs.

Obligations during the usual course of employment

The PWD Act further provides that no PWD shall be dismissed or suffer any reduction in rank on the grounds of disability or acquiring any disability. If any employee with a disability is placed under undue stress or disadvantage in the usual course of employment as a result of their disability, that employee shall be eligible for a position at the same rank with adequate support. Such an employee may, if required by the nature of disability, be deployed to another post with the same pay scale and service and, if it is not possible to adjust the employee against any post, the employee may be kept on a supernumerary post until a suitable post is available or they attain the age of retirement, whichever is earlier. While the provision is well-intentioned, it places the full burden of accommodation and employment continuity on the employer without providing flexibility to adapt to business realities. In practice, it may lead to challenges in implementation and potential disputes over compliance.

The PWD Act sets the age of retirement for PWDs to be 5 years above the mandatory age of retirement set by the Government of Kenya.

In order to confirm compliance with the above requirements, employers are now required to submit an annual report on the status of employment of PWDs within their establishments to the Council. However, as the PWD Act is still quite new, it remains to be seen how these obligations will be implemented in practice. In addition, the PWD Act does not prescribe the reporting format and frequency of audits, leaving gaps that could undermine compliance certainty. These details may, however, be addressed in regulations issued pursuant to the PWD Act.

Substantial financial incentives

The PWD Act doesn’t just impose obligations, it rewards compliance with significant tax benefits. To incentivise compliance and support workplace inclusion, private employers who engage a PWDs and who improve or modify their physical facilities or provide special services to accommodate employees with disabilities are entitled to substantial tax benefits, as set out below.

Tax deduction of 25% on salaries and wages paid to employees with disabilities

A private employer that engages a PWD either as a regular employee, apprentice or learner will be entitled to apply for a deduction from its taxable income equivalent to 25% of the total amount paid as salary and wages to such employee. For example, if an employer pays KES 1 million in annual wages to a PWD employee, it can claim an additional KES 250,000 (25%) deduction from taxable income, over and above the standard wage expense deduction.

Tax deduction of 50% on costs for workplace modifications and reasonable accommodations

An employer that improves or modifies its physical facilities or avails special services in order to provide reasonable accommodation for employees with disabilities shall be entitled to apply for additional deductions from its net taxable income equivalent to 50% of the direct costs of the improvements, modifications or special services. For example, if an employer spends KES 500,000 to install ramps, lifts or accessible bathrooms, it may claim an additional KES 250,000 (50%) deduction from taxable income, in addition to the normal business expense deduction. However, the reimbursement scheme lacks detailed procedures, leaving uncertainty on timelines, eligibility, and funding availability. The high cost of retrofitting may also strain smaller developers, risking partial compliance or project delays.

These tax incentives extend to workplace modifications, assistive technology costs and reasonable accommodation expenses, creating a financial framework that rewards inclusive employment practices while simultaneously addressing the business case for disability inclusion. Although the incentives reflect a progressive policy shift, their robustness depends on clear implementing regulations, which have yet to be issued. In their absence, the business case remains partly theoretical.

Accessibility and infrastructure requirements

The PWD Act establishes accessibility standards for all buildings, transport modes, pedestrian infrastructure and public transport systems, with no building permitted to receive completion certificates without compliance. These standards require suitable entries and exits, universal design standards, accessible facilities at transport hubs, and proper building access features including ramps, elevators, railings and accessible bathrooms.

The Council may also issue adjustment orders for inaccessible premises, services or amenities, requiring owners to undertake necessary modifications at their own expense within specified timeframes. An adjustment order will describe the premises or service, explain why it is inaccessible, and require the owner or provider to make changes at their own expense within a set period. Before issuing an order, the Council must first give notice, specify the changes needed, and allow representations from the affected party. Aggrieved persons may appeal to the High Court within 30 days. Failure to comply with an adjustment order is an offence punishable by a fine of up to KES 5 million or imprisonment for up to 5 years.

This framework is strong on paper but may prove challenging in practice. The requirement that adjustments be carried out “at the owner’s expense” imposes heavy compliance costs, especially for SMEs, MSMEs and service providers. Although the PWD Act allows appeals, litigation could delay projects and increase costs. The effectiveness of this tool will depend on how consistently the Council consults county governments and regulatory agencies, and whether sufficient technical guidance is given to businesses on what constitutes accessibility

What organisations need to do

The PWD Act requires immediate attention from all organisations operating in Kenya, as non-compliance carries severe penalties, while compliance offers both legal protection and significant financial incentives. In practice, the scope covers both employment settings (quotas, workplace policies and reporting) and everyday life contexts (public transport, infrastructure and service delivery). Businesses must separate obligations linked to employment from those tied to customer or public access, as compliance strategies differ significantly.

The interconnected nature of the PWD Act’s provisions means that successful compliance requires a holistic approach that addresses employment practices, physical accessibility, service delivery, information provision and staff training. The lack of guidance from regulators means early adopters will be navigating untested ground, facing both compliance costs and uncertainty over enforcement priorities.

Immediate steps for employers

To ensure compliance with the new legal requirements under the PWD Act and to promote an inclusive workplace for PWDs, employers should take the following immediate steps:

• conduct an internal audit of PWDs’ representation to assess compliance with the 5% quota;
• update human resource policies to include non-discrimination, accommodation procedures and reporting obligations;
• budget for workplace modifications and explore available tax deductions;
• establish a reporting mechanism to prepare annual returns for the Council; and
• train managers and human resource staff on the PWD Act’s provisions and how they differ from everyday non-employment obligations.

Njeri Wagacha, Arnold Mutisya and Ian Ounoi

Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr

TRANSPORTATION ARTICLES

SOUTH AFRICA

SCAM ALERT: How fraudsters can exploit new Aarto system to send ‘ghost fines’

The new Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences has opened the door for exploitation from scammers, according to critics.

The Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences (Aarto) Act, set to begin a phased rollout on 1 December 2025, fundamentally changes how traffic fines are handled.

Under the new system, fines will be processed administratively rather than through the courts, with a 50% discount offered for early payments, the right to dispute fines, nominate another driver, or pay in instalments.

However, the Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse (Outa) has warned that technical issues and incomplete infrastructure can lead to wrongful fines and opportunities for corruption.

Scammers may also be able to send ‘ghost fines’ with fake SMS and cloned websites to trick motorists into paying for penalties they did not receive.

Experts are advising drivers to verify all fines via the official Aarto website or app, and use only RTIA-approved payment systems.

“When it comes to payments, whether it is fines or not, you should always give it a second thought… have a zero trust mindset,”says cybersecurity expert Anna Collard.

She adds that you should never click on any link that comes in via SMS or email.

Keely Goodall

EWN