Tax Administration Act: Extension of date to request a reduced or additional assessment

Financial Markets Act: JSE Interest Rate and Currency Derivatives Rules: Tri- Party Repurchase Transactions: Amendments: Comments invited

Petroleum Pipelines Levies Act: Levy and Interest payable on Petroleum Pipelines Industry

Petroleum Pipelines Levies Act: Levy and interest payable on Piped-Gas Industry

PROCUREMENT

Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act: Regulations: Preference Points Claim Form

TRANSPORTATION

Railway Safety Act: Commencement excluding sections 4, 34-35, 38, 48, 50-52, 54-56, 62, 64-65 and 68

Civil Aviation Act: Regulations

South Africa’s SCA Reinforces Judicial Support for Arbitration Agreements

The arrival of dual citizenship in South Africa and its consequences

Verify before you pay: South Africa’s SCA reinforces buyer’s duty in BEC fraud case

ESG forecast: what’s on the horizon for in-house teams? (Q3 2025)

Is the COFI Bill finally kicking in?

New Rules for Payment Providers: What You Need to Know about the Draft Directive on Payment Activities

South Africa’s driving licence demerit system gets new launch date

AGRICULTURE

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Marketing of Agricultural Products Act:

Application for continuation of statutory measures in Wine and Brandy Industry: Comments invited

G 52939 GeN 3351

– Comment by 18 Jul 2025

04 July 2025

APPLIES TO: 

Primary Agriculture

• Grape growers (for wine and brandy production)
• Viticulture consultants and suppliers (e.g., irrigation, fertilizers, pest control)

 Wine and Brandy Production

• Wine producers and cellars
• Brandy distillers
• Co-operatives and private wineries
• Bulk wine and spirit processors

 Supply Chain & Logistics

• Packaging companies (bottles, labels, corks, etc.)
• Transport and logistics providers
• Cold chain and warehousing services

Export and Trade

• Exporters of wine and brandy
• Freight forwarders and customs brokers
• International distributors and agents

Business Intelligence & Compliance

• SAWIS and similar data/reporting service providers
• Compliance consultants (for registration, records, and returns)
• Auditors and legal advisors (especially for levy compliance)

Marketing & Promotion

• WOSA and other promotional bodies
• Advertising and branding agencies
• Event organizers (wine expos, tastings, etc.)
• Tourism operators (wine routes, tasting rooms, etc.)

Purpose of the Notice

• The Department of Agriculture received a request from SA Wine NPC to continue statutory measures in the wine and brandy industry for another four years (2026–2029).
• The current measures expire on 31 December 2025.

Statutory Measures Requested

1.     Registration

2.     Records & Returns

3.     Levies:

·       RDI Levy (Research, Development & Information)

·       Export Levy (Wine export promotion)

·       Brandy Levy (Brandy market development)

Entities Involved

• SA Wine NPC: Applicant and administrator of the measures.
• SAWIS: Handles registration, records, and returns.
• WOSA: Manages international wine promotion.
• SABF: Focuses on local brandy market growth.

Objectives of the Measures

• Registration & Records: Ensure accurate, timely industry data for informed decision-making.
• RDI Levy: Fund research, innovation, training, policy advocacy, and wine tourism.
• Export Levy: Promote SA wine globally, support SMMEs and BEE exporters, and maintain the Wine-on-Line system.
• Brandy Levy: Develop a transformed, competitive brandy sector and position SA brandy as a quality global product.

Levy Application

• Each product is levied only once per levy type.
• At least 20% of levy funds will go toward transformation projects.

Call for Public Input

• Directly affected groups (e.g., producers, traders, exporters) are invited to submit written comments.
• Deadline: 18 July 2025
• Contact: Mathilda van der Walt – mathildavdw@namc.co.za

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, LAND REFORM AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT

NOTICE 3351 OF 2025

SOUTH AFRICAN WINE AND BRANDY INDUSTRY

APPLICATION FOR THE CONTINUATION OF STATUTORY MEASURES IN THE WINE AND BRANDY INDUSTRY

NAMC REQUESTING COMMENTS / INPUTS FROM DIRECTLY AFFECTED GROUPS IN THE WINE AND BRANDY INDUSTRY

On 2 June 2025, the Minister of Agriculture, received a request, in terms of the Marketing of Agricultural Products Act (MAP Act), Act No 47 of 1996, for the continuation of statutory measures (registration, records & returns and levies) in the South African wine and brandy industry. It is proposed that the statutory measures be implemented for a new four-year period from 1 January 2026 to 31 December 2029. The current statutory measures will expire on 31 December 2025.

The applicant for the proposed statutory measures is South Africa Wine NPC, (SA Wine), representing the role players in the wine and brandy industry. The proposed statutory measures are as follows:

• Registration;

• Records & Returns; and

• Levies:

o Research, development and information levy (RDI levy);

o Wine export generic promotion levy (Export levy); and

o Brandy generic promotion levy (Brandy levy).

SA Wine contracted the following business units / non-profit companies (NPCs) to conduct its operational or business services, namely –

1. WOSA (WoSA Export Marketing NPC): International Market Growth;

2. SAWIS (SA Wine Industry Information and Systems NPC): Business Intelligence. SAWIS is also responsible for administering the registration and records & returns statutory measures; and

3. SABF (South African Brandy Foundation): Market Growth – Local Brandy.

The purpose and objective of the statutory measures in the wine and brandy industry are as follows:

– Registration and Records & Returns:

To ensure that continuous, timeous and accurate information is available to all role players. Market information is deemed essential for all role players for them to make informed decisions.

By combining compulsory registration with the keeping of information and the rendering of returns on an individual basis, market information for the whole of the industry can be processed and disseminated and will form the basis for the collection of statutory levies. SAWIS will be responsible for the above-mentioned statutory measures.

– Payment of the statutory levy amount for the funding of the following functions in the wine and brandy industry, namely:

• Research, Development and Information Levy (RDI levy)

To co-ordinate and fund research and development, innovation, training, technology and knowledge transfer, business intelligence, media and communication, tourism and advocacy, stakeholder engagement, conducive policies that ensure license to trade and market access in the wine industry.

According to South Africa Wine, the industry can only prosper over the long term if it remains competitive, is inclusive, has a conducive regulatory environment that include access to relevant research, continue to invest in skills and can create more opportunities via market access. The RDI levy will be invested within a clear strategy governed with oversight by the South Africa Wine Board. Specific focus areas that will be managed with a programme approach includes: research and innovation, information and business intelligence, policy, stakeholder management and market access, media and communication and wine tourism.

• Wine Export Generic Promotion Levy (Export levy)

To generically promote SA wines on selected export markets and to improve the efficiency of the export process.

According to SA Wine, the export levy will assist the SA wine industry to remain competitive in the global marketplace. In addition, it will assist in capacity building among all exporters, in particular SMME’s and BEE’s, and in improving the efficiency of the export process. A portion of the levy is also be used to fund, maintain and further develop the Wine-on-Line system, a free, user friendly, automated export certification process.

• Brandy Generic Promotion Levy (Brandy levy)

The objective of the brandy levy is to contribute to creating a transformed and responsible value chain and focus market for brandy. An integrated approach in collaboration with the wine industry will have a larger impact on the entire value chain. This is important to empower new entrants into the category and offer support/mentorship to ensure successful launches.

The proposed brandy levy is to be used to grow the entire brandy industry and to position South African brandy as a credibly quality alternative to Cognac, locally and globally.

The following levy amounts are proposed:

SA Wine is the responsible entity for the implementation and administration of the statutory measures in the industry.

A product is levied once only per levy. Thus, for example, if grapes intended for the production of wine were levied for the research, development and information levy, it cannot be levied in another format (such as wine) again for the research, development and information levy.

SA Wine will continue to spend at least 20% of the total amount of levies collected towards transformation projects.

The NAMC believes that the application by SA Wine for the continuation of the wine and brandy statutory measures is consistent with the objectives of the MAP Act (as set out in section 2 of the Act).

Directly affected groups (e.g. wine producers, wine traders, wine spirit producer, and exporters of drinking wine) in the wine and brandy industry are kindly requested to submit any comments, in writing, regarding the proposed statutory measures, to Mathilda van der Walt (mathildavdw@namc.co.za) on or before 18 July 2025, to enable the NAMC to finalise its recommendation to the Minister in this regard.

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Marketing of Agricultural Products Act: Application for continuation of statutory measures in Wine and Brandy Industry: Comments invited

G 52939 GeN 3351

– Comment by 18 Jul 2025

04 July 2025

52939gen3351.pdf

ACTION

Please ensure that you submit your comments before 18 July 2025.

Plant Breeder’s Rights Act:

Regulations: Amendment

G 52939 GoN 6385

04 July 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1.     Individual Plant Breeders

·       Independent researchers or horticulturists who develop new plant varieties.

2.     Breeding Institutions

·       Universities, agricultural colleges, and public research institutions involved in plant breeding.

3.     Commercial Seed Companies

·       Private companies that develop, produce, and sell seeds or plant material.

4.     Multinational Corporations

·       Especially those involved in biotechnology and agriculture, often applying through local agents

5.     Foreign Breeders

·       May apply for rights in South Africa but must do so through a local agent.

6.     Farmers and Growers

·       While not typically applicants, they are affected by the rights granted, especially regarding the use, saving, or selling of protected varieties.

7.     Government and Regulatory Bodies

·       Such as the Registrar for Plant Breeders’ Rights, which oversees applications, testing, and enforcement.

SUMMED UP

Regulatory Update

• The Minister has amended the regulations under Section 44 of the Act.
• The amendment includes a new Table 2, which outlines fees payable with effect from 1 April 2025.

Updated Fees (Effective 1 April 2025)

Here are some notable entries from the updated Table 2:

Some fees are listed in Swiss Francs (CHF) and are subject to exchange rate fluctuations, particularly for international testing and trial results.

DETAILS

Plant Breeder’s Rights Act: Regulations: Amendment

G 52939 GoN 6385

04 July 2025

52939gon6385.pdf

Take note of the new set of fees.

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Animal Diseases Act:

Control measures relating to foot and mouth disease

G 52942 GoN 6396

04 July 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1. Livestock Farming

• Cattle, sheep, goats, and pigs are cloven-hoofed animals directly affected by the movement restrictions.
• Farmers in the KwaZulu-Natal Disease Management Area cannot move animals without a state veterinary permit.
• This affects breeding, sales, auctions, and transport of livestock.

2. Animal Products Industry

• Includes meat processors, dairies, tanneries, and wool producers.
• Movement of meat, milk, hides, wool, and other products derived from cloven-hoofed animals is restricted.
• This could disrupt supply chains, especially for businesses exporting or importing these goods.

3. Genetic Material and Breeding Services

• Companies dealing with semen, embryos, and other genetic materials for artificial insemination or breeding programs are affected.
• Movement of such materials is restricted without permits, impacting genetic improvement programs.

4. Transport and Logistics

• Transporters of livestock and animal products must comply with permit regulations.
• Delays and increased costs due to permit processing and compliance checks.

5. Retail and Export Markets

• Retailers and exporters of meat and dairy products may face supply shortages or regulatory hurdles.
• Exporters may need to prove disease-free status or face import bans from other countries.

6. Smallholder and Subsistence Farmers

• Often lack resources to navigate permit systems.
• May suffer economic losses due to inability to sell or move animals.

7. Veterinary Services

• Increased demand for inspections, certifications, and disease surveillance.
• Vets play a key role in issuing permits and ensuring compliance.

SUMMED UP

Legal Notice

• Notice No. 6396 repeals the previous control measures (Notice No. 5997 of 17 March 2025).
• New control measures are prescribed in the attached Schedule.

Definitions

• “Foot and mouth disease” is defined as per Table 2 of the Animal Diseases Regulations.
• References are made to the Animal Diseases Regulations and their amendments from 1986 to 2014.

Objective

• To prevent the spread of FMD through the movement of:
  • Cloven-hoofed animals
  • Animal products from such animals
  • Genetic material from such animals

Movement Restrictions

• Prohibited: Movement of the above items from, to, or within the KwaZulu-Natal Disease Management Area.
• Exception: Only allowed with a state veterinary permit under Regulation 20(1).

KwaZulu-Natal Disease Management Area Includes:

• Entire areas of 13 local municipalities (e.g., Big Five Hlabisa, Mtubatuba, Nongoma, Ulundi, etc.)

• Partial areas of:
  • Mandeni Local Municipality (north of the Tugela River)
  • eDumbe Local Municipality (southeast of the Bivane River up to the R33 and east of the R33).

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Animal Diseases Act: Control measures relating to foot and mouth disease

G 52942 GoN 6396

04 July 2025

52942gon6396.pdf

ACTION

1. Obtain a State Veterinary Permit

• Required for any movement of:
  • Cloven-hoofed animals (e.g., cattle, sheep, goats, pigs)
  • Animal products (e.g., meat, milk, hides)
  • Genetic material (e.g., semen, embryos)

• Applies to movement from, to, or within the KwaZulu-Natal Disease Management Area.
• Permits must comply with Regulation 20(1) of the Animal Diseases Regulations.

2. Comply with Permit Conditions

• Organizations must strictly follow all conditions attached to the veterinary permit.

• This may include:
  • Quarantine protocols
  • Health inspections
  • Disinfection procedures
  • Transport route restrictions

3. Identify If You Operate in a Restricted Area

• The notice lists specific municipalities in KwaZulu-Natal that are part of the Disease Management Area.
• Organizations operating in these areas must review their operations and halt unauthorized movements.

📞 4. Coordinate with Veterinary Authorities

• Engage with state veterinary services for:
  • Permit applications
  • Disease surveillance
  • Reporting suspected cases

5. Educate Staff and Partners

• Ensure that all employees, transporters, and supply chain partners are:
  • Aware of the restrictions
  • Trained on compliance procedures

6. Maintain Records

• Keep detailed records of:
  • Animal movements
  • Permit applications and approvals
  • Health inspections and veterinary reports

CUSTOMS AND EXCISE

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Customs and Excise Act:

Amendment to Part 1 of Schedule No. 1 (1/1/1956) (English / Afrikaans)

G 52938 RG 11851 GoN 6378

04 July 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1. Electronic Cigarette (E-Cigarette) Industry

• Manufacturers of e-cigarettes and vaporising devices must comply with new customs classifications and duty structures.
• Importers and exporters of these products are directly impacted by the changes in tariff codes and duty rates.

2. Vaping Liquid Producers

• Companies that produce or distribute vaping liquids, whether or not they contain nicotine, are affected by the new customs classifications.

3. Retail and Wholesale Distributors

• Businesses that sell e-cigarettes or vaping products in South Africa must be aware of the updated customs duties and ensure compliance with import regulations.

4. Logistics and Customs Brokerage

• Freight forwarders, customs brokers, and logistics providers handling these products must update their systems to reflect the new tariff codes and duty-free status.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Customs and Excise Act: Amendment to Part 1 of Schedule No. 1 (1/1/1956) (English / Afrikaans)

G 52938 RG 11851 GoN 6378

04 July 2025

52938rg11851gon6378.pdf

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Customs and Excise Act:

Amendment to Part 1E of Schedule No. 6 (6/1E/21) (English / Afrikaans)

G 52938 RG 11851 GoN 6380

04 July 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1. Tobacco Industry

• Manufacturers of cigarettes and other tobacco products must comply with new rules for handling off-spec, deteriorated, or contaminated goods.
• Warehousing and logistics operations must ensure proper documentation and supervision for returns and destruction.
• Exporters of tobacco products from customs warehouses are also affected.

2. Electronic Cigarette (Vaping) Industry

• Manufacturers and importers of e-cigarettes and vaping liquids (with or without nicotine) are now subject to specific rebate items (622.24, 622.25, 622.26).
• Retailers and distributors must ensure compliance with packaging and return conditions for refunds or reprocessing.
• Customs warehouses handling these products must maintain detailed records and follow strict procedures for returns and destruction.

3. Export and Logistics Sector

• Companies involved in exporting excisable goods (including supply to foreign-going ships and aircraft) must adhere to the updated rebate conditions.
• Customs and excise warehouses play a central role in managing these goods and ensuring compliance.

4. Diplomatic and Foreign Missions

• Entities supplying excisable goods to diplomatic and foreign representatives under rebate items 406.02, 406.03, or 406.05 are affected by the clarified conditions in the amended notes.

5. Licensed Customs and Excise Manufacturing Warehouses

• These facilities are central to the implementation of the new rules, especially for:
  • Reprocessing or destruction of defective goods,
  • Record-keeping and reporting,
  • Claiming refunds or duty set-offs.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Customs and Excise Act: Amendment to Part 1E of Schedule No. 6 (6/1E/21) (English / Afrikaans)

G 52938 RG 11851 GoN 6380

04 July 2025

52938rg11851gon6380.pdf

ACTION

1. Review and Update Internal Compliance Procedures

• Ensure all relevant departments (legal, compliance, logistics, finance) are aware of the new rebate item conditions and documentation requirements.
• Update internal SOPs for handling returns, reprocessing, and destruction of excisable goods.

2. Manage Returns of Off-Spec or Contaminated Products

• Only return goods to a licensed customs and excise manufacturing warehouse.

• Ensure:
  • The excise duty value on returned goods is ≥ R25,000.
  • Returns occur within 12 months of removal from the warehouse.
  • Products are in original sealed outer containers (e.g., 9,000 cigarettes minimum for cigarette returns).
  • A credit note and delivery note accompany the return.

3. Maintain Detailed Records

Warehouse licensees must record:

• Description and tariff item of goods received.
• Quantity and date of receipt.
• Name and address of the sender.
• Delivery documentation.

4. Prepare for SARS Inspections

• Returned goods must be:
  • Kept intact and separate until inspected.
  • Unpacked and processed or destroyed under SARS officer supervision.

5. Claim Refunds or Set-Offs

• If proof of excise duty paid is available, claim a refund.
• If not, SARS will calculate the refund at the lowest applicable duty rate in the past 12 months.
• Refunds can be set off against future excise accounts for up to two years.

6. Exporters and Diplomatic Suppliers

• Ensure goods exported or supplied to diplomatic missions comply with the updated rebate item conditions (622.05, 622.07, 622.08, 622.10, 622.12, etc.).

7. For Vaping and E-Cigarette Businesses

• Understand that full duty rebates and refunds now apply to:
  • Electronic cigarettes and vaporising devices with vaping liquid, regardless of nicotine content.

• Ensure correct classification under tariff item 116.10.10 and rebate items 622.24–622.26.

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Customs and Excise Act: Amendment to Part 2A of Schedule No. 1 (1/2A/165) (English / Afrikaans)

G 52938 RG 11851 GoN 6379

04 July 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1. Electronics and Electrical Equipment Industry

• Specifically those involved in:
  • Manufacturing or importing machinery and mechanical appliances,
  • Electrical equipment and parts,
  • Sound and television recording/reproducing devices.

2. Vaping and E-Cigarette Industry

• This includes:
  • Manufacturers, importers, and distributors of electronic cigarettes and personal vaporising devices,
  • Businesses dealing in vaping liquids, whether or not they contain nicotine.

• A new excise duty of R3.18 per millilitre is now applicable to vaping liquids contained in these devices.

3. Retail and Wholesale Trade

• Retailers and wholesalers of vaping products and electronic devices must now account for the new excise duties in pricing, inventory, and compliance systems.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Customs and Excise Act: Amendment to Part 2A of Schedule No. 1 (1/2A/165) (English / Afrikaans)

G 52938 RG 11851 GoN 6379

04 July 2025

52938rg11851gon6379.pdf

ACTION

1. Apply the New Excise Duty Rate

• Implement the R3.18 per millilitre excise duty on vaping liquids, whether or not they contain nicotine, when pre-filled in electronic cigarettes or vaporising devices.
• Ensure this rate is applied at the point of import, manufacture, or sale as required by SARS.

2. Update Product Classification and Tariff Codes

• Classify products under the correct tariff items:
  • 116.10 for electronic cigarettes and vaporising devices,
  • 116.10.10 for those pre-filled with vaping liquid.

• Ensure customs declarations and invoices reflect these updated codes.

3. Adjust Pricing and Cost Structures

• Recalculate product pricing to account for the new excise duty.
• Update financial models and forecasts to reflect the increased tax burden.

4. Update Accounting and Tax Reporting Systems

• Modify ERP and accounting systems to:
  • Track excise duty per millilitre,
  • Report and remit the correct amounts to SARS.

5. Inform Supply Chain and Retail Partners

• Notify distributors, wholesalers, and retailers of the new duty and its implications on pricing and compliance.
• Ensure all parties in the supply chain are aligned on documentation and duty payments.

6. Train Staff and Compliance Teams

• Educate relevant teams on:
  • The new excise duty structure,
  • Proper classification and documentation,
  • SARS reporting requirements.

ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Electronic Communications Act:

Draft Digital Terrestrial Television Regulations, 2025; and explanatory memorandum on the Draft Digital Terrestrial Television Regulations, 2025: Written representations invited

G 52946 GeN 3355

– Comment by 03 Aug 2025

04 July 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1. Broadcasting Industry

• Public broadcasters like the SABC will be directly affected, especially with the proposed allocation of Multiplexes (Muxes) 1 and 5 exclusively to them for HD broadcasting
• Commercial free-to-air broadcasters (e.g., e.tv) and subscription broadcasters (e.g., DStv) will need to adapt to new spectrum allocations and licensing conditions.

2. Digital Media and Content Providers

• Companies that produce or distribute digital video content will be impacted by the technical standards (e.g., continued use of DVB-T2) and spectrum access rules.
• Streaming platforms may also be indirectly affected if spectrum reallocation influences consumer access to digital TV.

3. Telecommunications and Infrastructure Providers

• Firms involved in broadcast infrastructure, such as signal distributors (e.g., Sentech), will need to align with the new multiplex configurations and coverage requirements.
• Tower and transmission service providers may see changes in demand based on the new geographic and technical requirements.

4. Legal and Regulatory Advisory Firms

• Legal firms and consultants specializing in telecommunications law will be engaged to assist broadcasters and new entrants in navigating the licensing and compliance processes.

5. New Market Entrants and Innovators

• The regulations aim to open up the broadcasting space to new players, including community broadcasters and innovative digital service providers

SUMMED UP

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

INDEPENDENT COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY OF SOUTH AFRICA

NOTICE 3355 OF 2025

THE INDEPENDENT COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY OF SOUTH AFRICA

DRAFT DIGITAL TERRESTRIAL TELEVISION REGULATIONS, 2025

1. The Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (“the Authority”) hereby publishes the draft Digital Terrestrial Television (DTT) Regulations (“draft Regulations”) in terms of section 4(1) (a), (b) and (d), read with section 30 (2)(c) of the Electronic Communications Act, 2005 (Act No. 36 of 2005).

2. A copy of the draft DTT Regulations will also be made available on the Authority’s website at http://www.icasa.org.za or can be sent via email upon request by interested persons.

3. The Authority hereby invites interested persons to make written representations on the draft DTT Regulations within thirty (30) working days from the date of publication, by e-mail to PCokie@icasa.org.za (in Microsoft Word or PDF) or hand delivery and marked specifically for attention:

Ms. Pumela Cokie

Independent Communications Authority of South Africa

350 Witch-Hazel Road, Eco- Park

Centurion

0157

4. Enquiries should be directed to Ms. Honey Makola at 012 568 3665 or HMakola@icasa.org.za between 10h00 and 16h00, Monday to Friday.

5. Stakeholders may request confidentiality in terms of section 4D of the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa Act, 2000 (Act No. 13 of 2000) (“ICASA Act”), on any information submitted to the Authority. Such a request for confidentiality must be accompanied by a confidential and nonconfidential version of the stakeholder’s submission. The Authority hereby refers stakeholders to the Guidelines for Confidentiality Requests published in Government Gazette No. 41839 (Notice No. 849) of 17 August 2018, in order to assist them when applying for confidentiality.

6. Non-confidential versions of the written representations received by the Authority pursuant to this notice will be made available on the Authority’s website and for inspection at the Authority’s library.

7. Persons submitting written representations are further invited to indicate, as part of their submissions, whether they require an opportunity to make oral representations on the draft Regulations, should the Authority elect to hold public hearings.

Please click on the link provided below for more information.

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Electronic Communications Act: Draft Digital Terrestrial Television Regulations, 2025; and explanatory memorandum on the Draft Digital Terrestrial Television Regulations, 2025: Written representations invited

G 52946 GeN 3355

– Comment by 03 Aug 2025

04 July 2025

52946gen3355.pdf

ACTION

Please ensure that you submit your comments before 03 August 2025.

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Electronic Communications Act:

Regulations: Numbering Plan: Amendments: Comments invited

G 52944 GeN 3354

– Comment by 03 Aug 2025

04 July 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1. Mobile Network Operators (MNOs)

• Companies like Cell C, MTN, Telkom, and Vodacom—who have already submitted comments—are directly affected.
• These operators must adapt to changes in number allocation, deactivation, and recycling of mobile numbers.

2. Fixed-Line and VoIP Service Providers

• Providers of landline and Voice over IP (VoIP) services will need to comply with updated numbering structures and allocation rules.

3. Internet Service Providers (ISPs)

• ISPs that offer bundled voice and data services may be impacted by changes in number assignment and management.

4. Enterprise Telecom and Call Center Operators

• Businesses that manage large blocks of numbers for customer service or outbound calling will need to ensure compliance with new allocation and usage rules.

5. Regulatory and Legal Advisory Firms

• Firms advising on telecom compliance, licensing, and regulatory affairs will be involved in interpreting and implementing the new rules for clients.

6. Telecom Infrastructure and Software Vendors

• Companies providing number management systems, billing platforms, and CRM tools must update their systems to reflect the new numbering plan structure.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

INDEPENDENT COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY OF SOUTH AFRICA

NOTICE 3354 OF 2025

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE DRAFT NUMBERING PLAN REGULATIONS, 2016 UNDER CHAPTER 11 OF THE ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS ACT, 2005 (ACT NO. 36 OF 2005)

1. On 21 September 2023 the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (“ICASA / the Authority”) published the Draft Amendment Numbering Plan Regulations, 2023 for public input. By the deadline, 02 November 2023, the Authority had received four (4) written submissions from Cell C, MTN, Telkom and Vodacom.

2. The Authority held public hearings on 17 April 2024 wherein the abovementioned stakeholders participated in the public hearings.

3. Subsequent to the above consultations and considerations of submissions made by stakeholders, the Authority has decided, having taken into account the inputs received, to further consult on the proposed amendments.

4. The Authority hereby publishes the proposed amendments to the Draft Numbering Plan Regulations for a final public consultation. 5. A copy of the draft Regulations is available on the Authority’s website at http://www.icasa.org.za.

6. Written representations on the draft Regulations must be submitted to the Authority thirty (30) working days from the date of the publication of this notice by e-mail to: ELetlape@icasa.org.za .

7. Non-confidential versions of the written representations received by the Authority pursuant to this notice will be made available on the Authority’s website and for inspection at the Authority’s library.

8. Stakeholders may request confidentiality in terms of section 4D of the  Independent Communications Authority of South Africa Act, 2000 (Act No. 13 of 2000) (“ICASA Act”), on any information submitted to the Authority. Such request for confidentiality must be accompanied by a confidential and nonconfidential version of the stakeholder’s submission. The Authority hereby refers stakeholders to the Guidelines for Confidentiality Request published in Government Gazette No. 41839 (Notice No. 849) of 17 August 2018.

9. Persons submitting written representations are further invited to indicate, as part of their submissions, whether they require an opportunity to make oral presentations on the draft Regulations should the Authority elect to hold public hearings.

10.All enquiries should be directed to Mr Elias Letlape, Project Manager at 012 568 3323 between 09h00 and 16h00, from Monday to Friday.

Please click on the link provided below for more information.

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Electronic Communications Act: Regulations: Numbering Plan: Amendments: Comments invited

G 52944 GeN 3354

– Comment by 03 Aug 2025

04 July 2025

52944gen3354.pdf

ACTION

Ensure that you submit your comments before 03 August 2025.

ENVIRONMENTAL

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

National Environmental Management:

Integrated Coastal Management: Draft regulations: Environmental Management of Offshore Ship-to-ship Transfer: Comments invited

G 52943 GoN 6397

– Comment by 03 Aug 2025

04 July 2025

APPLIES TO: 

• Applies to all persons and organs of state involved in offshore STS transfers.
• Covers bunkering and transfer of liquid bulk cargo (e.g., oil, chemicals, LNG) outside operational harbour areas.

SUMMED UP

New Prohibitions

• STS transfers are banned:
  • Within marine protected areas or within 5 nautical miles of them.
  • Within or near aquaculture development zones.
  • Within 3 nautical miles of the high-water mark.
  • At night, unless specific safety and detection plans are approved.

Wildlife Protection

• Mandatory visual and hydrophone monitoring for marine mammals and penguins.
• Transfers must pause if wildlife is detected within 500 meters.
• Operators must report sightings and incidents (e.g., oiled or injured animals) to the Department.

Weather and Safety Conditions

• Transfers in Algoa Bay require:
  • Wind < 22 knots.
  • Wave height < 2 meters.
  • Compliance with national codes of good practice.
• Minister may set weather rules for other areas.

Spill Prevention and Response

• Operators must:
  • Use drip trays, booms, and gas detection systems.
  • Have a spill response vessel on standby within 30 minutes’ reach.
  • Use biodegradable detergents only.

Training Requirements

• All crew must undergo environmental awareness training.
• Training must be developed by an independent specialist and approved by the Minister.

STS Environmental Management Plan (EMP)

• Mandatory for all operators.

• Must include:
  • Risk assessments, wildlife response strategies, noise mitigation, spill contingency plans, and monitoring protocols.

• Must be developed by an independent specialist and submitted for Ministerial approval.

Algoa Bay Specific Rules

• Only 3 operators and 6 tankers allowed at a time.
• No transfers in Anchorage 2 from 1 April to 31 August, unless in emergency.

Emergency Exemptions

• Transfers due to force majeure or emergencies are exempt from these regulations.

Notifications and Authorisations

• Spills must be reported under Section 30 of NEMA.
• Existing environmental authorisations may be recognized as STS EMPs.

Offences and Penalties

• Violations can result in:
  • Fines up to R2 million.
  • Imprisonment up to 5 years.
  • Or both.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management: Draft regulations: Environmental Management of Offshore Ship-to-ship Transfer: Comments invited

G 52943 GoN 6397

– Comment by 03 Aug 2025

04 July 2025

52943gon6397.pdf

ACTION

Please ensure that you submit your comments before 03 August 2025

FINANCE

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Tax Administration Act:

Extension of date to request a reduced or additional assessment (English / Afrikaans)

G 52939 GoN 6390

04 July 2025

SUMMED UP

Extension of Deadline for Tax Assessment Requests

Under Section 95(6) of the Tax Administration Act, 2011 (Act No. 28 of 2011), the Acting Commissioner of SARS, Johnstone Makhubu, has announced:

• The deadline for taxpayers who received an automatic assessment (as per Notice No. 6217 in Government Gazette No. 52712, dated 23 May 2025) to request a reduced or additional assessment has been extended to 20 October 2025.
• Exception: This extension does not apply if the automatic assessment was issued on 22 August 2025.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Tax Administration Act: Extension of date to request a reduced or additional assessment (English / Afrikaans)

G 52939 GoN 6390

04 July 2025

52939gon6390.pdf

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Financial Markets Act: JSE Interest Rate and Currency Derivatives Rules:

Tri- Party Repurchase Transactions: Amendments: Comments invited

G 52939 BN 805

– Comment by 18 Jul 2025

04 July 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1. Financial Services and Banking

• Banks and investment firms that engage in repo (repurchase) transactions will be directly impacted.
• Tri-party repo structures involve a third-party agent (like Strate) to manage collateral, settlement, and custody, which changes operational and compliance processes for financial institutions.

2. Capital Markets and Trading

• Broker-dealers, market makers, and institutional investors active in the JSE’s interest rate and currency derivatives markets will need to adapt to the new rules.
• The amendments aim to enhance post-trade efficiency, reduce administrative overhead, and improve risk management.

3. Clearing and Settlement Infrastructure

• Central securities depositories (CSDs) like Strate will play a central role as tri-party agents.
• These entities will manage collateral selection, custody, and substitution, and facilitate settlement in case of default.

4. Legal and Compliance

• Legal teams in financial institutions will need to review and update repo agreements to align with the new tri-party framework.
• Compliance departments must ensure adherence to the revised JSE rules and FSCA regulatory expectations.

Treasury and Risk Management

• Corporate treasuries and asset managers using repos for liquidity or yield enhancement will need to understand the operational and risk implications of tri-party arrangements.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

BOARD NOTICE 805 OF 2025

NOTICE OF 2025

FINANCIAL SECTOR CONDUCT AUTHORITY

FINANCIAL MARKETS ACT, 2012

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE JSE INTEREST RATE AND CURRENCY DERIVATIVES RULES: TRI-PARTY REPURCHASE TRANSACTIONS

The Financial Sector Conduct Authority (“FSCA”) hereby gives notice under section 71(3)(b)(ii) of the Financial Markets Act, 2012 (Act No. 19 of 2012) that the proposed amendments to the JSE rules have been published on the official website of the FSCA (www.fsca.co.za) for public comment. All interested persons who have any objections to the proposed amendments are hereby called upon to lodge their objections with the FSCA on email: Queries.Marketinfrastructures@fsca.co.za within a period of fourteen (14) days from the date of publication of this notice.

Mr Shreelin Naicker

Head of Department

Markets, Issuers and Intermediaries Department

Financial Sector Conduct Authority

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Financial Markets Act: JSE Interest Rate and Currency Derivatives Rules: Tri- Party Repurchase Transactions: Amendments: Comments invited

G 52939 BN 805

– Comment by 18 Jul 2025

04 July 2025

52939bn805.pdf

ACTION

Please ensure that you submit your comments before 18 July 2025.

MEDICAL

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Pharmacy Act: South African Pharmacy Council:

Bachelor of Pharmacy – Integrated Curriculum Outline

G 52945 BN 807

04 July 2025

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Pharmacy Act: South African Pharmacy Council: Bachelor of Pharmacy – Integrated Curriculum Outline

G 52945 BN 807

04 July 2025

52946bn807.pdf

INCORRECT DOCUMENT ATTACHED TO LINK

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Pharmacy Act:

Criteria to accredit a course to be completed by Foreign- Qualified Pharmacy Technicians

G 52940 BN 806

04 July 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1. Pharmaceutical Industry

• Especially institutions involved in training, accrediting, or employing pharmacy technicians.
• It sets criteria for accrediting courses that foreign-qualified pharmacy technicians must complete to practice in South Africa.

2. Education and Training Providers

• Universities, colleges, and private institutions offering pharmacy technician bridging or qualification programs will need to align their curricula with the new accreditation standards.

3. International Health Workforce Recruitment

• Agencies and employers involved in recruiting foreign-qualified pharmacy technicians will be affected by the new requirements for local accreditation.

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Pharmacy Act: Criteria to accredit a course to be completed by Foreign- Qualified Pharmacy Technicians

G 52940 BN 806

04 July 2025

52940bn806.pdf

ACTION

1. Pharmaceutical Employers (e.g., Pharmacies, Hospitals, Clinics)

• Review hiring policies to ensure foreign-qualified pharmacy technicians meet the new course accreditation requirements.
• Collaborate with accredited training providers to support employees needing to complete the required bridging or adaptation courses.
• Plan for transitional staffing if current or prospective employees must undergo additional training before registration.

2. Education and Training Institutions

• Align course offerings with the new accreditation criteria, including:
  • Minimum entrance requirements.
  • Duration and structure of training.
  • Assessment methods and certification procedures.
  • Recognition of prior learning (RPL).

• Apply for course accreditation with the South African Pharmacy Council (SAPC) if offering or planning to offer training for foreign-qualified pharmacy technicians.
• Ensure facilitators meet qualification standards and that administrative systems comply with SAPC requirements.

3. Recruitment Agencies and International Placement Services

• Update candidate screening processes to reflect the new SAPC requirements.
• Inform foreign-qualified pharmacy technicians of the need to complete accredited courses before practicing in South Africa.
• Coordinate with accredited institutions to facilitate course enrollment for recruits.

4. Legal and Compliance Teams

• Monitor regulatory timelines: Public comments on the proposed criteria must be submitted within 30 days of the notice’s publication.
• Advise stakeholders on compliance obligations under the Pharmacy Act, 1974 and related regulations.

PENSION FUNDS

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Pension Funds Act:

Various Retirement Funds (in liquidation): Notice of General meetings of all members and beneficiaries – 25 July 2025

G 52939 GoN 6386

04 July 2025

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Pension Funds Act: Various Retirement Funds (in liquidation): Notice of General meetings of all members and beneficiaries – 25 July 2025

G 52939 GoN 6386

04 July 2025

52939gon6386.pdf

PETROLEUM

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Petroleum Pipelines Levies Act:

Levy and Interest payable on Petroleum Pipelines Industry

G 52939 GoN 6388

04 July 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1. Petroleum and Energy Industry

• Refiners, producers, and importers of petroleum products are required to pay the levy.
• Companies holding title to petroleum at the point it enters the pipeline system are financially responsible.
• This includes both upstream (extraction and production) and midstream (transport and storage) operators.

2. Fuel Logistics and Pipeline Operators

• Entities involved in the transportation of petroleum via pipelines will be impacted by the levy, as it affects the cost structure of pipeline usage.
• Pipeline infrastructure companies must account for the levy in their operational and financial planning.

3. Industrial and Commercial Fuel Consumers

• Large-scale fuel consumers (e.g., manufacturing, mining, aviation, and agriculture) may experience cost pass-throughs from suppliers due to the levy.
• This could influence fuel pricing strategies and supply chain costs.

4. Financial and Compliance Departments

• Companies in the petroleum value chain must ensure timely payment of the levy to avoid interest charges.
• Finance and compliance teams must integrate the levy into their tax and regulatory reporting systems.

5. Regulatory and Advisory Services

• Legal, tax, and energy consultants advising clients in the petroleum sector must update their guidance to reflect the new levy structure and compliance obligations.

SUMMED UP

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

DEPARTMENT OF MINERAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY

NO. 6388 4 July 2025

DEPARTMENT OF MINERAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY

NATIONAL ENERGY REGULATOR OF SOUTH AFRICA

NOTICE IN TERMS OF SECTION 2(7) OF THE

PETROLEUM PIPELINES LEVIES ACT, 2004 (ACT NO. 28 OF 2004)

Levy and Interest payable on Petroleum Pipelines Industry The Minister of Electricity and Energy, in concurrence with the Minister of Finance, has approved the budget and the levies for the petroleum pipelines industry in terms of section 2(4) of the Petroleum Pipelines Levies Act, 2004 (Act No. 28 of 2004), as proposed by the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA), for the 2025/26 financial year.

The levy for the petroleum pipelines is 0.46865 c/l, in respect of the amount of petroleum, measured in litres, delivered by importers, refiners and producers to the inlet flanges of petroleum pipelines and will be paid by the person holding the title to the petroleum immediately after it has entered the inlet flange.

The interest on late payment for the petroleum pipeline levy is determined in terms of section 4(2) of the Petroleum Pipelines Levies Act, 2004.

The levy was determined based on an estimated volume of 15.8 billion litres per annum, as well as the 2025/26 Annual Performance Plan and budget requirement of R74,122,297 for the regulation of the petroleum pipelines industry.

NERSA, acting under section 2(7) of the Petroleum Pipelines Levies Act, 2004, hereby publishes the notice on the imposition of the levies for the petroleum pipelines industry at 0.46865 c/l for the 2025/26 financial year, as approved by the Minister of Electricity and Energy, in concurrence with the Minister of Finance.

Enquiries are to be directed at: the Chief Financial Officer, Ms Bulelwa Pono, on telephone number: 012 401 4621 or at bulelwa.pono@nersa.org.za

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Petroleum Pipelines Levies Act: Levy and Interest payable on Petroleum Pipelines Industry

G 52939 GoN 6388

04 July 2025

52939gon6388.pdf

ACTION

1. Petroleum Producers, Importers, and Refiners

• Calculate and budget for the new levy of 0.46865 cents per litre on petroleum delivered to pipeline inlet flanges.
• Ensure accurate volume tracking of petroleum delivered to pipelines to determine levy obligations.
• Update contracts and pricing models to reflect the cost implications of the levy, especially if passing costs to downstream clients.

2. Finance and Accounting Departments

• Incorporate the levy into financial planning for the 2025/26 fiscal year.
• Set up systems for timely payment of the levy to avoid interest charges under Section 4(2) of the Petroleum Pipelines Levies Act.
• Maintain documentation for audit and compliance purposes, including proof of payment and volume records.

3. Legal and Compliance Teams

• Review compliance obligations under the Petroleum Pipelines Levies Act, 2004.
• Ensure that the entity holding title to the petroleum at the inlet flange is clearly identified and responsible for payment.
• Monitor for updates from NERSA or the Department regarding enforcement or reporting requirements.

4. Pipeline Operators and Logistics Providers

• Coordinate with clients (title holders) to ensure levy responsibilities are understood and fulfilled.
• Adjust operational billing systems to reflect the levy where applicable.

5. Industry Associations and Stakeholders

• Engage with NERSA or the Department if clarification is needed.
• Communicate the implications of the levy to members and stakeholders, especially regarding cost impacts and compliance timelines.

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Petroleum Pipelines Levies Act:

Levy and interest payable on Piped-Gas Industry

G 52939 GoN 6389

04 July 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1. Natural Gas Producers and Importers

• Companies that produce or import piped gas are directly liable for the levy.
• They must pay the levy based on the volume of gas delivered to pipeline inlet flanges.

2. Gas Transmission and Distribution Operators

• While not directly responsible for the levy, these operators must coordinate with title holders to ensure accurate volume tracking and levy compliance.
• Infrastructure planning and pricing models may be affected.

3. Industrial Gas Consumers

• Industries such as manufacturing, mining, chemicals, and food processing that rely on piped gas may face cost increases if suppliers pass on the levy.
• These sectors should assess the impact on operational costs and energy procurement strategies.

4. Energy Utilities and Municipal Gas Services

• Public and private utilities distributing piped gas to residential or commercial users will need to factor the levy into tariff structures and billing systems.

5. Financial, Legal, and Compliance Departments

• Entities involved in the piped-gas value chain must:
  • Ensure timely payment of the levy to avoid interest penalties.
  • Update financial systems to reflect the new levy.
  • Review contracts to clarify who holds title to the gas at the inlet flange and is thus responsible for payment.

DETAILS

DEPARTMENT OF MINERAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY

NO. 6389 4 July 2025

NATIONAL ENERGY REGULATOR OF SOUTH AFRICA

NOTICE IN TERMS OF SECTION 2(7) OF THE GAS REGULATOR LEVIES ACT, 2002 (ACT NO. 75 OF 2002)

Levy and Interest payable on Piped-Gas Industry

The Minister of Electricity and Energy, in concurrence with the Minister of Finance, has approved the budget and the levies for the piped-gas industry in terms of section 2(4) of the Gas Regulator Levies Act, 2002 (Act No. 75 of 2002), as proposed by the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA), for the 2025/26 financial year.

The levy for piped-gas is 51.931 c/Gj in respect of the amount of gas, measured in gigajoule, delivered by importers and producers to the inlet flanges of transmission or distribution pipelines, and will be paid by the person holding the title to the gas at the inlet flange.

The interest on late payment for the piped-gas levy is determined in terms of section 4(2) of the Gas Regulator Levies Act, 2002.

The levy was determined based on an estimated volume of 180.0 million GJ per annum, as well as the 2025/26 Annual Performance Plan and budget requirement of R93,475,734 for the regulation of the piped-gas industry.

NERSA, acting under section 2(7) of the Gas Regulator Levies Act, 2002, hereby publishes the notice on the imposition of the levies for the piped-gas industry at 51.931 c/Gj for the 2025/26 financial year, as approved by the Minister of Electricity and Energy, in concurrence with the Minister of Finance.

Enquiries are to be directed at: the Chief Financial Officer, Ms Bulelwa Pono, on

telephone number: 012 401 4621 or at bulelwa.pono@nersa.org.za

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Petroleum Pipelines Levies Act: Levy and interest payable on Piped-Gas Industry

G 52939 GoN 6389

04 July 2025

52939gon6389.pdf

ACTION

1. Gas Producers and Importers

• Identify the title holder of the gas at the inlet flange of transmission or distribution pipelines—this party is responsible for paying the levy.
• Track and report gas volumes accurately to calculate levy obligations.
• Incorporate the levy into pricing models and contracts with downstream buyers.

2. Finance and Accounting Departments

• Update financial systems to include the new levy in cost accounting and billing.
• Ensure timely payments to avoid interest charges under Section 4(2) of the Gas Regulator Levies Act.
• Maintain records of gas volumes and levy payments for audit and regulatory review.

3. Legal and Compliance Teams

• Review contractual terms to ensure clarity on who holds title to the gas at the point of levy imposition.
• Ensure compliance with the Gas Regulator Levies Act and NERSA’s reporting requirements.
• Monitor for updates or clarifications from NERSA or the Department.

4. Transmission and Distribution Pipeline Operators

• Coordinate with gas suppliers to ensure accurate volume metering at inlet flanges.
• Facilitate data sharing and documentation to support levy calculations and compliance.

5. Industrial Gas Consumers

• Engage with suppliers to understand how the levy may affect gas pricing.
• Adjust procurement strategies if necessary to manage cost impacts.

PROCUREMENT

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act:

Regulations: Preference Points Claim Form

G 52957 GoN 6398

08 July 2025

APPLIES TO: 

This notice affects any industry or business sector that participates in public procurement or tenders for government contracts. Specifically, it impacts:

1. Construction and Infrastructure

• Companies bidding for public works, roads, housing, and infrastructure development projects.

2. Engineering and Technical Services

• Firms offering consulting, design, or technical services to government departments.

3. Manufacturing and Supply

• Suppliers of goods, equipment, and materials to the public sector.

4. Professional Services

• Legal, financial, IT, HR, and management consulting firms tendering for government contracts.

5. Logistics and Transport

• Businesses involved in the delivery of goods or services to government institutions.

6. Facilities and Maintenance Services

• Cleaning, security, landscaping, and maintenance service providers.

Key Implications for These Industries

• Preference points are awarded based on:

• • Price (80 or 90 points depending on tender value).

• • Specific goals (20 or 10 points), including:
    • Ownership by HDIs (Historically Disadvantaged Individuals).
    • Ownership by women, youth, and persons with disabilities.

• Failure to submit proof of eligibility for specific goals may result in no points awarded.

• Fraudulent claims can lead to:
  • Disqualification.
  • Contract cancellation.
  • Legal action or blacklisting for up to 10 years.

SUMMED UP

1. Applicable Preference Point Systems

• 80/20 system: For tenders up to R50 million.
• 90/10 system: For tenders above R50 million.
• The applicable system must be specified by the organ of state, or determined based on the lowest/highest acceptable tender.

2. Scoring Criteria

• Points are awarded for:
  • Price (up to 80 or 90 points).
  • Specific goals (up to 20 or 10 points).

3. Specific Goals and Points Allocation

• Points are awarded based on ownership by:
  • HDIs (Historically Disadvantaged Individuals)
  • Women
  • Youth
  • Persons with Disabilities

Example (80/20 system):

• Women ownership:
  • 91–100% = 8 points
  • 0% = 0 points

• Youth ownership:
  • 81–100% = 6 points
  • 0% = 0 points

Example (90/10 system):

• Women ownership:
  • 81–100% = 4 points
  • 0% = 0 points

4. Proof and Verification

Tenderers must submit supporting documentation to claim points.

• The organ of state may request substantiation at any stage.

5. Fraud and Misrepresentation

• If false claims are made:
  • Disqualification from the tender process.
  • Contract cancellation and damages recovery.

• • Blacklisting for up to 10 years.
  • Possible criminal prosecution.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act: Regulations: Preference Points Claim Form

G 52957 GoN 6398

08 July 2025

52957gon6398.pdf

ACTION

1. Understand the Applicable Preference Point System

• Determine whether the 80/20 or 90/10 system applies based on the tender value:
  • 80/20: For tenders ≤ R50 million.
  • 90/10: For tenders > R50 million.

• Ensure your pricing and documentation align with the applicable system.

2. Prepare and Submit the SBD 6.1 Form

• Complete the form accurately and fully as part of your tender submission.

• Clearly indicate:
  • Your company’s ownership profile (HDIs, women, youth, persons with disabilities).
  • The points you are claiming under each category.

• Attach supporting documentation (e.g., share certificates, ID copies, affidavits) to validate your claims.

3. Review and Update Company Records

• Ensure your ownership structure is up to date and properly documented.
• If your company qualifies under specific goals, ensure this is reflected in your registration documents and B-BBEE certificate (if applicable).

4. Train Bid Preparation Teams

• Educate your procurement or bid teams on:
  • The new preference point system.
  • How to calculate and claim points.
  • The risks of misrepresentation, including disqualification and legal consequences.

5. Avoid Fraudulent Claims

• Only claim points you can legally and factually support.

• Be aware that fraudulent claims can lead to:
  • Disqualification.
  • Contract cancellation.
  • Blacklisting for up to 10 years.
  • Criminal prosecution.

6. Monitor Tender Notices

• Stay updated on new tenders and changes to procurement rules via:
  • www.gpwonline.co.za
  • The relevant departmental websites.

TRANSPORTATION

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Railway Safety Act:

Commencement excluding sections 4, 34-35, 38, 48, 50-52, 54-56, 62, 64-65 and 68 [English/ Sepedi]

G 52947 P 269

07 July 2025

APPLIES TO: 

🚆 1. Railway Operators and Infrastructure Managers

• Passenger and freight rail operators (e.g., PRASA, Transnet Freight Rail).
• Entities responsible for railway infrastructure, including track, signaling, and stations.
• Required to obtain railway safety permits, implement safety management systems, and comply with safety-critical grade requirements.

🏗️ 2. Construction and Engineering

• Companies involved in the design, construction, and maintenance of railway infrastructure.
• Must adhere to safety standards and may be subject to oversight by the Railway Safety Regulator.

🛠️ 3. Manufacturing and Supply Chain

• Manufacturers and suppliers of railway equipment, rolling stock, signaling systems, and safety technologies.
• Must ensure products meet regulatory safety standards.

🧑‍🏫 4. Training and Certification Providers

• Institutions offering railway safety training and certification for safety-critical roles.
• Must align with the Act’s requirements for competency and safety awareness.

🧾 5. Legal, Compliance, and Risk Management

• Legal and compliance teams in affected organisations must ensure adherence to the Act, including:
  • Incident reporting.
  • Regulatory audits.
  • Appeals and enforcement mechanisms.

🏛️ 6. Government and Regulatory Bodies

• The Railway Safety Regulator (RSR) continues to operate under this Act with expanded powers.
• Other departments (e.g., Transport, Labour, Environment) may be involved in inter-agency coordination.

🧑‍🤝‍🧑 7. Labour and Human Resources

• HR departments must ensure that employees in safety-critical roles are properly trained, certified, and fit for duty.
• Labour unions may also be involved in consultations on safety standards.

SUMMED UP

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

Sections in green below have commenced

Sections in red below have not commenced

001 Definitions

002.   Application of Act

003.   Objects of Act

004.   Exemption from Act

No commencement date yet

005.   Railway Safety Regulator

006.   Objects of Regulator

007.   Functions and powers of Regulator

008.   International co-operation

009.   Board of Regulator

010.   Composition of board

011.   Appointment of board members

012.   Chairperson and deputy chairperson of board

013.   Term of office and conditions of service of board members

014.   Functions of board

015.   Disqualification from appointment as board member

016.   Termination of board membership

017.   Meetings of board

018.   Committees of board

019.   Conflict of interest of board member or board committee member

020.   Delegation by board

021.   Dissolution of board

022.   Chief executive officer

023.   Functions of CEO

024.   Staff of Regulator

025.   Limitation of liability

026.   Documents

027.   Funds of Regulator

028.   Financial year of Regulator

029.   Reporting to Minister and Parliament

030.   Safety permits

031.   Conditions of safety permit

032.   Amendment of conditions of safety permit

033.   Surrender, suspension and revocation of safety permit

034.   Safety critical grade framework

No commencement date yet

035.   Evaluation and registration of training institutions

No commencement date yet

036.   Railway safety standards

037.   Safety management system

038.   Consultative forum

No commencement date yet

039.   National railway safety information and monitoring system

040.   Protection of information

041.   Railway safety inspector

042.   Powers and duties of railway safety inspector

043.   Routine compliance inspection

044.   Enforcement inspection

045.   Formalities of inspections

046.   Duty to assist railway safety inspector

047.   Powers of railway safety inspector to deal with unsafe conditions

048.   Railway occurrence

049.   Reporting of railway occurrence

050.   Categories of railway occurrence investigations

No commencement date yet

051.   Major investigation

No commencement date yet

052.   Standard investigation

No commencement date yet

053.   Commission of inquiry

054.   Appeal to CEO

No commencement date yet

055.   Appeal to board appeals committee

No commencement date yet

056.   Appeal to Transport Appeal Tribunal

No commencement date yet

057.   Offences and penalties

058.   Offences in relation to employer or principal

059.   Liability of director, trustee or member of juristic person

060.   Enquiry in respect of compensation and award of damages

061.   Regulations and notices

062.   Regulations regarding design, construction, alteration and new operations

No commencement date yet

063.   Regulations regarding infrastructure or activity affecting safe railway operations

064.   Regulations regarding assessment and information

065.   Regulations regarding railway occurrence and railway occurrence investigations

No commencement date yet

066.   Notice regarding fees

067.   Regulations and procedure regarding compliance notices and penalties

068.   Regulations regarding safety critical grades and training institutions

No commencement date yet

069.   Transitional provisions and savings

070.   Repeal of law

071.   Short title and commencement

Railway Safety Act: Commencement excluding sections 4, 34-35, 38, 48, 50-52, 54-56, 62, 64-65 and 68 [English/ Sepedi]

G 52947 P 269

07 July 2025

52947pr269.pdf

ACTION

1. Railway Operators (Passenger, Freight, and Station Operators)

• Apply for or renew railway safety permits under the new framework (Section 30).
• Implement or update Safety Management Systems (SMS) as required by Section 37.
• Ensure compliance with new railway safety standards (Section 36).
• Prepare for inspections and audits by the Railway Safety Regulator (Sections 39–41).
• Report railway occurrences as defined under Section 48.
• Review operational procedures to align with the new legal definitions and responsibilities.

2. Infrastructure Developers and Engineering Firms

• Assess project designs for compliance with updated safety requirements.
• Coordinate with operators to ensure new works or upgrades meet the Act’s safety expectations.
• Document risk assessments and mitigation strategies for construction near or on railway networks.

3. Rolling Stock and Equipment Manufacturers

• Ensure all rolling stock and components meet the prescribed safety standards.
• Support clients (operators) with documentation needed for safety permit applications.
• Prepare for technical audits or inspections related to equipment safety.

4. Training and Certification Providers

• While Section 35 (training institution) is not yet in force, providers should:
  • Align curricula with the Act’s safety principles.
  • Prepare to meet future accreditation requirements once Section 35 is enacted.

5. Legal, Compliance, and Risk Management Teams

• Review contracts and operational policies to ensure alignment with the new Act.
• Establish internal compliance frameworks for monitoring adherence to the Act.
• Train staff on legal obligations, especially regarding safety reporting and inspections.

6. Government and Regulatory Bodies

• Update internal procedures for issuing permits, conducting inspections, and enforcing compliance.
• Coordinate with the Railway Safety Regulator to ensure consistent application of the Act.
• Engage stakeholders to support smooth implementation and awareness.

Key Sections Not Yet in Force

The following sections are excluded from the 1 August 2025 commencement and will be activated later:

• Section 4: Application of the Act.
• Sections 34–35: Safety-critical grades and training institutions.
• Section 38: Safety permit conditions.
• Sections 50–52, 54–56: Enforcement, penalties, and appeals.
• Section 62: Regulations.
• Section 65: Transitional provisions.
• Section 68: Safety-critical grade designations.

LAW AND TYPE OF NOTICE

Civil Aviation Act: Regulations

G 52939 GoN 6391

04 July 2025

APPLIES TO: 

1.     Civil Aviation

·       Airlines, charter services, and general aviation operators must comply with updated regulations.

2.     Pilot Training and Licensing

·       Flight schools and training organisations will need to align with changes in evidence-based training, national pilot licensing, and advanced qualification programs.

3.     Aerodrome and Heliport Management

·       Operators of airports and heliports must adhere to revised standards for infrastructure, safety, and operations.

4.     Air Traffic Services

·       Air navigation service providers and air traffic controllers are impacted by changes to airspace management and technical standards.

FULL TEXT

DETAILS

LINK TO FULL NOTICE

Civil Aviation Act: Regulations

G 52939 GoN 6391

04 July 2025

52939gon6391.pdf

ACTION

Please submit your comments before 03 August 2025.

ARBITRATION ARTICLES

SOUTH AFRICA

South Africa’s SCA Reinforces Judicial Support for Arbitration Agreements

Emerging arbitration jurisdictions often face challenges in establishing themselves as credible and reliable seats for international arbitration with a key focus on achieving minimal judicial intervention. This however presents somewhat of a contradiction because the attitude of the court will generally only be evidenced through its published judgments.

This is why, when courts are involved, their decisions must be clear, consistent, and aligned with international best practice. In Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa Limited and Another v Kalagadi Manganese (Pty) Ltd, the Supreme Court of Appeal (“SCA“) delivered a decisive judgment that reinforced the binding nature of arbitration agreements and underscored South Africa’s adherence to international arbitration principles.

The SCA confirmed that arbitration agreements, particularly in the context of international commercial disputes, are binding and must be respected by the courts. At issue was Kalagadi’s default on over R 6 billion in loans, prompting the Industrial Development Corporation (“IDC“) to initiate business rescue proceedings against Kalagadi. Kalagadi countered with an application to restructure its debt and block enforcement of security rights. Although the High Court ordered a joint hearing, it declined to consolidate the matters, acknowledging their distinct legal bases.

The High Court dismissed preliminary objections raised by the IDC and the African Development Bank, including arguments based on the enforcement of a mandatory arbitration clause. It held that the presence of overlapping issues and the constitutional right of access to the courts justified bypassing the arbitration agreement and proceeding with litigation. On appeal, the SCA disagreed with the High Court and overturned its decision.

The SCA, applying settled principles of contractual interpretation, found that the arbitration clause was mandatory. The use of the word “shall” left no room for court-discretion. The clause extended to all disputes arising under the agreement and, due to the cross-border nature of the parties and the designated seat of arbitration being London, meant that the International Arbitration Act 15 of 2017 (“IAA“) applied.

South Africa’s arbitration framework strongly upholds the enforceability of arbitration agreements. Under Section 3 of the domestic Arbitration Act, courts may only set aside such agreements where ‘good cause’ is shown, and Section 6 allows a party to seek a stay of court proceedings in favour of arbitration. In these cases, the burden lies with the party seeking to avoid arbitration to justify why the agreement should not be enforced. This provision has received criticism due to a lack of alignment with international best practice.

The IAA, in contrast, adopts a more robust and internationally aligned approach. Article 8 of Schedule 1 to the IAA goes further than Section 3 of the Domestic Act and requires courts to stay proceedings and refer disputes to arbitration unless the agreement is “null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed.”

This distinction between the discretionary language of the Domestic Arbitration Act and the mandatory language of the IAA is critical. The SCA in the Kalagadi judgment underscored this point, holding that under Article 8(1) of Schedule 1 to the IAA, courts are obliged to refer disputes to arbitration unless one of the narrow exceptions applies. The SCA found that the High Court had erred in relying on the outdated test found in Section 3 of the Domestic Arbitration Act, which no longer governs international arbitration matters. Importantly, the SCA also clarified that courts have a duty to apply the correct legal framework, even where the parties themselves fail to raise it, reinforcing the judiciary’s role in upholding the integrity of arbitration agreements in line with international standards.

On the business rescue front, the SCA made it clear: parallel proceedings do not override arbitration agreements. Each application must be assessed on its own legal footing, and factual overlap is not a license for judicial interference to bypass an arbitration agreement. The SCA also reaffirmed that where parties have voluntarily chosen arbitration, courts must respect that decision—even if it means foregoing their constitutional right of access to the courts.

Kalagadi’s argument that the IDC, as a public entity, lacked the authority to enter into arbitration agreements was rejected. The SCA confirmed that public bodies regularly engage in arbitration and that Section 5 of the International Arbitration Act expressly permits such agreements in international commercial matters. This clarification is timely and reflects a growing continental trend. At the recent ICCA–KIAC Conference in Kigali, particular emphasis was placed on the need for governments and other public entities to honour arbitration agreements they have entered into, reinforcing the principle that public bodies must be held to the same standard of accountability as private parties.

The SCA’s ruling adds to a growing body of case law affirming South Africa’s strong pro-arbitration stance and its commitment to limiting judicial interference in arbitral proceedings. It also highlights the courts’ active engagement with the International Arbitration Act, applying it in line with international best practices and the principles of the UNCITRAL Model Law. For businesses, the message is clear: arbitration clauses are binding and must be taken seriously. As Africa continues to position itself as a global arbitration hub, companies should ensure their contracts are well-drafted, arbitration-ready, and legally robust.

The significance of the Kalagadi judgment lies not only in its affirmation of South Africa’s pro-arbitration stance but also in its broader implications for legal certainty and investor confidence. By firmly applying the IAA and rejecting outdated domestic law principles, the SCA has sent a clear signal that South Africa is serious about aligning with international best practice. This clarity is especially critical for cross-border commercial parties who rely on the predictability and enforceability of arbitration agreements. In a region where emerging jurisdictions are striving to establish themselves as credible arbitration seats, such jurisprudence strengthens South Africa’s position as a leading arbitration seat on the continent—one where courts respect party autonomy and uphold the rule of law in arbitration.

Jonathan Ripley-Evans and Kyle Melville

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP

The arrival of dual citizenship in South Africa and its consequences

On 6 May 2025, in the matter of Democratic Alliance v Minister of Home Affairs and Another (CC) (unreported case no CCT 184/23, 6-5-2025) (Maya CJ, Madlanga ADCJ, Majiedt J, Mhlantla J, Seegobin AJ, Theron J, Tolmay AJ and Tshiqi J) (‘the judgment’), the Constitutional Court held, inter alia, that the concept of dual citizenship was consistent with the Constitution. It held further at para 70, that ‘those [South African] citizens who lost their citizenship by operation of section 6(1)(a) of the South African Citizenship Act 88 of 1995 [“the 1995 Act”] are deemed not to have lost their citizenship.’

The decades’ old question that plagued some South Africans, diaspora and others – ‘Am I a South African or have I lost my citizenship by acquiring another?’ – is now replaced by the new two-part question, ‘If I did lose it, do I now have it back or not?’ A riddle worthy of Schrodinger’s poor old cat.

It is important to note that the judgment applies only to those persons who may have fallen foul of the 1995 Act. There was legislation during the apartheid era Republic and even under the Union, which had similar provisions and in terms of which, erstwhile South African citizens lost their citizenship automatically. The judgment does not come to the rescue of persons who lost – or may have lost – their South African citizenship in terms of those earlier statutes. They continue to have lost their South African citizenship.

Persons who fall into this latter category and who consider that they should be able to recover their citizenship, should seek legal advice on the matter.

The judgment’s good news has immediate consequences, however, for those of the South African diaspora who might wish to visit ‘the old country’.

Section 26B(1) of the 1995 Act provides that South African citizens must enter and leave South Africa (SA) on their South African passports. It is a criminal offence not to.

And therein lies a serious practical challenge for both the diaspora and the Minister of Home Affairs.

The Minister’s response to the judgment has been to say that he will consider whether or not the 1995 Act now needs to be amended. In addition, he said that the Department of Home Affairs will set up an online portal so that ‘… where any person who believes they were adversely effected by the unconstitutional provision can lodge an online case to confirm their citizenship reinstatement.’

The Department’s stated response will presumably target three categories of effected persons.

These three categories are:

(A) Those who were South African by birth and who had received a communication from the Department or an Embassy advising them that they had lost their South African citizenship in terms of the Act.

(B) Those who were South African citizens other than by birth, in terms of the Act, and who had received a similar communication.

(C) Those South African citizens who obtained a second citizenship without ever giving notice to the Department of Home Affairs and never having receiving one of these loss-of-citizenship letters issued in terms of the Act.

Category A may likely be a complex problem. This is because in terms of Ministerial policy those who are South Africans by birth, have a ‘birthright’ to return to SA even if they had been told that they had lost their South African citizenship. The birthright would take the form of re-classifying the erstwhile citizen on the National Population Register as being a person with permanent residence status. These persons would also then be issued with a new identity number reflecting that changed status. And many in category A would subsequently have applied for and been issued with a new identity document – or it may still be in process. All that would have to be undone and set right.

Those falling into category B – naturalised citizens who subsequently obtained another citizenship and who were advised of this by the Department – should, in theory anyway, be the least problematic fix for the Minister. This is because unlike category A, there was no consequential reclassification of their status. This would be the case unless the erstwhile South African citizen has since returned to SA and obtained permanent residence. In that event the fix would likely be a variant of that in category A.

And then there is category C. In theory, these cases should not require any intervention by the Department. It is only once we see the intended portal will we know if the Department wants there to be frank disclosure by all those effected by the now-invalid section.

The elephant in the room, assuming the portal is set up with the minimum of delay, is how long it will take the Department to attend to these corrective applications. It goes without saying that the Department will first have to check and confirm that each applicant was previously a lawful citizen, as will be claimed in their application. The Department cannot allow persons to use the judgment to ‘whitewash’ their unlawfully obtained South African citizenship, which has gone unnoticed before now.

Based on current delivery times, it will take months to vet each application before it moves onto being fixed to reflect the Constitutional Court’s order – unless the Minister can come up with a very clever piece of lateral thinking. And those with applications in the pipeline will not be able to apply for their South African passports until they have an outcome from the Department.

There is, however, a whole other group of persons who are potentially affected by the judgment.

These are the children who were born to a parent (or parents) after they had lost their South African citizenship. Once the parent or parents have had their citizenship restored, the children will need to have their births registered in order that their South African citizenship can be secured. And to compound the challenges of these downstream cases, it is also likely that more than a few of these children will now be adults. And in some cases, the relevant parent or parents may unfortunately have passed away.

The Minister will also have to apply his mind to the question of whether the usually onerous requirements for a late registration of birth, will be reduced to assist these specific cases.

To conclude, in the short to medium term some of the effected people are unlikely to benefit from the good news, a new backlog is likely to arise at Home Affairs resulting in a further flurry of High Court applications seeking urgent relief.

Chris Watters BA LLB (Rhodes) is a senior legal practitioner at Chris Watters Attorneys in Johannesburg.
This article was first published in De Rebus in 2025 (July) DR 16.

CYBERCRIMES ARTICLES

Cybercrime represents a significant challenge in the digital age. The threat landscape is continually evolving, encompassing issues such as identity theft, phishing scams, ransomware attacks, and corporate data breaches. Data breaches occur when unauthorised individuals access confidential information maintained by organisations. Cybercriminals frequently target businesses with the object of stealing customer data, intellectual property, or trade secrets. The ramifications of data breaches can be significant, resulting in financial losses, legal liabilities, and damage to an organisation’s reputation.

As one of the developing countries, South Africa faces legal challenges related to cybercrime. The judiciary plays a crucial role in interpreting statutes and laws pertaining to cybercrime. While legislative bodies enact laws to address specific aspects of cybercrime, it is the responsibility of the courts to interpret, develop, and apply these statutes to individual cases. This article seeks to analyse the judiciary’s interpretation and development of laws pertaining to cybercrime.

Mosselbaai Boeredienste

In Mosselbaai Boeredienste (Pty) Ltd v OKB Motors CC 2024 (6) SA 564 (FB), the appellant and respondent entered into a verbal sale agreement under which the appellant agreed to purchase a motor vehicle from the respondent for

R 159 353,76. This amount was due on delivery of the motor vehicle. It is undisputed that the respondent failed to pay the purchase price, thereby breaching the verbal agreement. The appellant then instituted proceedings against the respondent for payment of the purchase price.

The respondent opposed the proceedings on the basis that the appellant provided an invoice containing their banking details, specifically an FNB Cheque Account. Acting in accordance with this information, the respondent made the payment to the account number specified on the invoice. Furthermore, the appellant, or its representatives, indicated that the correct banking details were reflected on the invoice. The respondent then relied on the accuracy of this information when executing the payment.

The respondent further filed a special plea, asserting that the representation made by the appellant or its representatives was due to the appellant’s electronic mail being ‘spoofed’, allowing a third party to alter the appellant’s bank account details on the invoice. Additionally, the plea contended that the appellant did not adequately secure its electronic mail system against ‘spoofing’. Consequently, the respondent incurred damages amounting to R 159 353,76 due to the false representation.

The court determined that an individual who sends an electronic mail typically remains unaware of any unauthorised access to their e-mail account, as well as any interception, hacking, or alteration of sent e-mails. Additionally, the court reaffirmed that precedents in cybercrime related cases impose a duty on the purchaser to verify the bank account details in the invoice before making payment, ensuring it goes to the seller and not an unidentified third party. If the purchaser fails to verify these details and pays into an incorrect account, this incorrect payment does not absolve the purchaser from the obligation and liability to settle the debt. In this case, the bank account details were not verified, and as a result, the respondent assumed the risk when they made the payment into the incorrect bank account.

Gripper & Company

In Gripper & Co (Pty) Ltd v Ganedhi Trading Enterprises CC 2025 (3) SA 279 (WCC), the applicant and the respondent had engaged in business transactions since 2014. During this period, the applicant consistently received payments from the respondent into a designated Standard Bank account. In October 2021, the applicant provided goods to the respondent and subsequently issued an invoice for R886 726,25 for those services.

In April 2021, the applicant and respondent agreed on a delayed payment arrangement where the respondent would pay R 886 726,25 by 27 May 2021. On 24 May 2021, the respondent made payment to an Absa Bank account, but the payment was intercepted by an unknown third party who committed fraud. The third party accessed the e-mail correspondence between the applicant’s and respondent’s representatives and posed as the applicant’s managing director.

The applicant then launched an application seeking an order for payment of R 886 726,25 for goods sold and delivered. In its defence, the respondent stated that a third party must have hacked the applicant’s e-mail system, for which it (the applicant) was to blame.

In its judgment, the court determined that the prevailing principle in our law places the obligation on the debtor to ‘seek out [their] creditor’ and that until payment is properly executed, the debtor assumes the risk of the payment being misappropriated or misplaced. The court asserted that the debtor acted at its own risk when it made the payment without adequately verifying the accuracy of the bank account details. A simple telephone call would have revealed that the invoice had been fraudulently altered, thereby preventing the payment from being made into the incorrect bank account.

The court further held that the focus of the courts in cases like this is on the fact that it is incumbent on the risk-bearing debtor, in making payment, to ensure that it achieves this. This does not require a great deal of effort – as the court in Mannesmann Demag (Pty) Ltd v Romatex Ltd and Another 1988 (4) SA 383 (D), stated – a simple telephone call may well suffice.

The court further outlined several factors that formed the basis for its criticism of the respondent’s conduct.

These factors include:

• It is a well-known fact among business professionals who utilise computer-based communication and payment methods that cybercrime is prevalent. Consequently, it is imperative to always exercise caution to mitigate its effects. The respondent could not have been unaware of this.
• The fact that the parties had engaged in business transactions for seven years, with payments consistently made into the same Standard Bank account.
• The significant amount of the invoice in this instance necessitated a bespoke payment agreement, rather than the standard cash on delivery arrangement.
• The initial fraudulent e-mail mentioned a requirement to ‘update our Absa banking details with you’, implying that the applicant had previously supplied Absa banking details, which was inaccurate. The respondent had exclusively made payments into a Standard Bank account.
• The respondent received what it describes as ‘e-mails requesting proof of payment’ between 13 and 24 May 2021, despite payment not being due under the agreed schedule. While the respondent has not disclosed the number of such e-mails, it can be inferred that there was sustained pressure from the fraudster to secure payment prematurely. Such unusual activity should have raised concerns, considering the previously cooperative nature of the business relationship.
• The e-mails in question appear to originate from a different e-mail address (‘griper.co.za’ instead of ‘gripper.co.za’).

The court determined that these factors highlighted the respondent’s neglect in taking prudent steps to ensure proper payment. It concluded that this negligence, rather than any actions by the applicant, was the direct cause of the improper payment. The court granted judgment in favour of the applicant.

 Other interpretations by the courts

In Galactic Auto (Pty) Ltd v Venter (LP) (unreported case no 4052/2017, 14-6-2019) (Makgoba JP), the plaintiff sold a motor vehicle to the defendant and subsequently initiated legal action against the defendant for the payment of the purchase price, which the plaintiff claimed had not been paid. The defendant raised the defence of estoppel and, alternatively, filed a counterclaim based on alleged misrepresentation by the plaintiff. The defendant asserted that the plaintiff, through its representatives, falsely represented that the purchase price had been paid into their bank account and received by them. However, it was determined from the undisputed facts that the plaintiff’s e-mails had been intercepted by a hacker, who altered the bank account details provided to the defendant. Consequently, the defendant made the payment into the fraudulent bank account. The court decided that Venter was liable for payment of the plaintiff’s claim and that his defense and counterclaim both failed. The court further stated that Venter, as the debtor, bore the liability and risk in the situation where invoices were intercepted and fraudulently altered.

In Andre Kock en Seun Vrystaat (Pty) Ltd v Willem Stephanus Snyman NO and Another (FB) (unreported case no 5180/2021, 27-6-2022) (Daniso J), the applicant sought payment of the purchase price from the respondents for livestock sold and delivered. The applicant sent its invoice by electronic mail to the respondents, but an unauthorised third party intercepted the e-mail. The invoice was altered to replace the applicant’s banking details with those of the hacker, and it was then sent to the respondents as if it came from the applicant’s e-mail account. The respondent subsequently paid the purchase price into the hacker’s account. The applicant argued that a forensic investigation determined the respondent’s e-mail account was compromised. The respondents denied liability, claiming there was no conclusive evidence that the fraud originated from their e-mail account. The court ruled that the respondent’s obligation to pay the applicant would only be fulfilled by direct payment to the applicant. When making electronic payments, verifying the creditor’s banking details is the debtor’s responsibility. The respondent assumed the e-mail was from the applicant and made the payment without verifying the banking information provided. The court ordered the respondents in their capacities as trustees of the trust to pay the applicant an amount of R 1 021 745,20 together with interest and costs.

In the case of Gerber v PSG Wealth Financial Planning (Pty) Ltd (GJ) (unreported case no 36447/2021, 23-3-2023) (Fisher J), the plaintiff held investments with the defendant in the form of shares and cash. Due to a fraudulent electronic mail request that appeared to originate from the plaintiff, the defendant transferred funds from the plaintiff’s account to a fraudulent account. The plaintiff sought repayment of the monies on the grounds of breach of contract by the defendant. The defendant argued first that there was an implied term in the contract absolving it from liability if the plaintiff’s computer system was hacked due to the plaintiff’s negligence. Secondly, the defendant raised estoppel, asserting that the plaintiff’s negligence led to his system being hacked, thereby allowing a misrepresentation regarding the incorrect account details.

The court determined that the defendant did not substantiate the claimed implied term, nor was there evidence indicating that the plaintiff had either acted improperly or failed to secure his system against hacking. The court concluded that the proximate cause of the loss was not the hacking itself but rather the defendant’s failure to exercise the necessary and contractually required vigilance when transferring trust monies to a different account.

Conclusion

The digital era offers immense opportunities, but it also comes with significant risks. Cybercrime is a formidable adversary that demands full attention and proactive efforts. The courts have been instrumental in developing the law dealing with cybercrime, creating precedents that guide legislative and enforcement practices. Through these precedents, the courts have adapted to the challenges posed by the digital age. As technology continues to advance, courts will remain at the forefront of shaping cybercrime law, ensuring that the legal system can effectively address the evolving landscape of cybercriminal activity. The judicial system’s ability to adapt and respond to these challenges will be crucial in maintaining the rule of law in the digital era.

It is imperative for the parties involved in every transaction to diligently fulfil their obligations when processing payments. As affirmed by the courts in the aforementioned judgments, banking details must be verified through a telephone call in addition to e-mail confirmation. Parties must also ensure that when calling to verify the banking details they contact the person who they normally deal with when doing business rather than the contact details provided on the invoice.

When a transaction involves a settlement agreement or any form of agreement, it is imperative that the agreement incorporates clauses detailing the payment verification procedures required by both parties to mitigate fraud disputes. This methodology will ensure shared responsibility for verification between the parties and establishes a clear framework for addressing any payment discrepancies.

Njabulo Kubheka BA LLB LLM (UKZN PMB) is a Legal Counsel with Absa Group Legal in Johannesburg.
This article was first published in De Rebus in 2025 (June) DR 20

Verify before you pay: South Africa’s SCA reinforces buyer’s duty in BEC fraud case

In Northcliff Nissan v Hyundai Louis Trichardt, South Africa’s Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) confirmed that Hyundai Louis Trichardt (Hyundai) was responsible for paying for two vehicles it purchased, even though a cybercriminal had fraudulently redirected the payment.

This decision aligns with previous decisions involving Business Email Compromise (BEC) fraud, underscoring that it is the buyer’s responsibility to verify payment details before transferring funds.

Case Background

In October 2018, Northcliff Nissan sold two vehicles to Hyundai for R290,000. The agreement was that Hyundai would pay via electronic funds transfer (EFT) using the banking details provided on emailed invoices. The vehicles would be released once payment was received.

Although Northcliff Nissan sent invoices with the correct banking details, Hyundai mistakenly transferred the funds to a fraudulent account after receiving altered invoices. As a result, Northcliff Nissan never received the payment, leading to a legal dispute over whether Hyundai had fulfilled its payment obligations.

Regional Court Ruling

The Regional Court found that Hyundai had failed to verify the banking details and was therefore liable. It ordered Hyundai to pay the R290,000, plus interest and legal costs.

High Court Appeal

On appeal, the High Court reversed the decision. It ruled that Northcliff Nissan had not proven a breach of contract by Hyundai. Since the claim was contractual rather than delictual (based on wrongdoing), the burden was on Northcliff Nissan to prove Hyundai’s breach. The claim was dismissed with costs.

Supreme Court of Appeal judgment

The SCA disagreed with the High Court’s reasoning. It clarified that Northcliff Nissan’s claim was simply for payment of the purchase price. Hyundai, in turn, claimed it had already paid. Therefore, Hyundai had the burden of proving that payment was made correctly.

The SCA reaffirmed a key legal principle: in a sale, the buyer must ensure that payment reaches the seller’s correct bank account. An EFT is only complete when the funds arrive in the intended account.

Because Hyundai failed to verify the banking details and paid into a fraudulent account, it had not fulfilled its obligations. The SCA ruled that Hyundai remained liable for the payment.

Key Takeaways

• BEC fraud is a growing threat in South Africa. The SCA emphasised the need for sound verification and payment controls.
• Buyers must verify banking details. The debtor must ensure payment is made to the correct account. Applying a two-factor authentication control before making a payment, such as a phone call to verify emailed bank account details, is a sensible safeguard. Use any verification tools available to check bank account confirmation letters and invoices.
• Falling victim to BEC fraud does not excuse payment obligations.
• Creditors are not legally required to protect buyers against BEC fraud. The SCA reaffirmed this, in line with its earlier decision in ENS v Hawarden, especially when the buyer failed to take reasonable precautions.

Reece Martin, Christopher MacRoberts, Ashleigh Maistry and Gina Willson

Clyde & Co LLP

HONG KONG AND USA

ESG forecast: what’s on the horizon for in-house teams? (Q3 2025)

A look at what is on the horizon for in-house and compliance teams, including the EU’s ongoing ESG overhaul, new sustainability reporting in Hong Kong, and the US tax and spending bill.

Lexology PRO scans the regulatory landscape to analyse key risks and trends, upcoming legislative changes, and regulatory updates across key areas of ESG to help businesses stay abreast – and ahead – of emerging issues. Find out more about what’s coming up in Q3 2025 below.

Plastics and recycling

On 1 July 2025, a series of plastic waste and extended producer responsibility (EPR) regulations came into effect across several US states. These include:

• Oregon’s EPR program, requiring producers of packaging, paper and food serviceware to begin paying membership fees to Circular Action Alliance to fund statewide recycling operations under the Recycling Modernization Act;
• Colorado’s ban on the sale of packaging and paper products from non-participating producers: producers using covered materials now cannot sell or distribute in Colorado unless enrolled in the state’s Producer Responsibility Program or an approved plan;
• restaurants in Delaware are no longer allowed to provide polystyrene foam containers under an amendment to the state’s Senate Bill 51. The restriction also applies to plastic straws, unless specifically requested by a customer; and
• producers introducing covered packaging or paper materials into Minnesota must register with Circular Action Alliance to comply with the Packaging Waste and Cost Reduction Act and continue operations in the state.

Also on 1 July 2025, India’s new rules on plastic packaging labelling came into effect. All importers, producers and brand owners in India are required to include additional information about their plastic packaging on labels as per the Plastic Waste Management (Amendment) Rules 2025.

In Canada, phase one of reporting to the Federal Plastics Registry’s IT system begins on 29 September 2025 for plastic packaging and single-use or disposable plastic products. Companies required to report plastic production, imports, and sales to the Federal Plastics Registry already have had access to the Registry’s IT system.

Corporate governance

In Australia, the Aged Care Act 2024 expands whistleblower protections for those reporting issues within the aged care sector to include older people, their families, and aged care workers. Previously, protections were more limited and focused primarily on employees within the sector. The changes took effect on 1 July 2025.

New corporate governance rules for issuers on Hong Kong’s stock exchange come into effect on 1 July 2025, including mandatory annual director training and the voluntary designation of a lead independent non-executive director.

France’s Decree No. 2025-482 took effect on 1 July 2025, requiring employers to implement preventive measures to protect workers from heat-related risks. This includes assessing heat exposure risks, adapting work schedules, providing heat-reduction equipment, and ensuring access to sufficient drinking water.

Litigation over President Trump’s executive orders targeting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) – Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing and Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity, which were issued on 20 and 21 January 2025, respectively – could also proceed in Q3 2025. Plaintiffs including the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education argued that the provisions were “unconstitutionally vague” and unlawfully infringed on their First Amendment rights.

Sustainability reporting

Businesses across Europe and further afield await clarity from the EU on the future of its core sustainability rules, with the next round of negotiations due to close on 2 July 2025. Legislators agreed to pause the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) for two years in April while they negotiate the Omnibus proposal.

The EU is keen to expedite the Omnibus, which is intended to scale back reporting and due diligence requirements for many companies, and negotiations are progressing between the Commission, EU Council and EU Parliament. Some clarity on the substance of the reforms and the timeline for their implementation is expected over the coming months. Lexology PRO’s ESG Omnibus Tracker keeps readers up-to-date on key developments.

However, companies in the first wave of CSRD reporting are due to report in 2025, and their existing compliance obligations are still in place. Any companies whose financial years began in Q3 2024 are due to report their emissions and other climate impacts in Q3 2025.

The Hong Kong Institute of Certified Public Accountants’ sustainability disclosure standards become effective on 1 August 2025. The standards seek full convergence with the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) framework and were published in September last year.

The UK government’s consultation on its Sustainability Reporting Standards (SRS) closes on 17 September 2025. It is part of plans to introduce corporate sustainability reporting aligned with the ISSB framework.

On the same day, the UK government launched a consultation on introducing mandatory net zero transition plan reporting for FTSE100 companies and financial institutions. That consultation is open until 17 September 2025. A third consultation, on ESG assurance, closes the same day.

Greenwashing

There is ongoing uncertainty over the EU’s proposed Green Claims Directive, which was at an advanced stage of negotiations but is widely expected to be withdrawn as part of the Omnibus simplification drive. A commission spokesperson told Lexology PRO the directive could survive the simplification drive if legislators agree to exempt small businesses, but if they do not agree it will be withdrawn altogether. Progress is expected at the next meeting of EU state representatives by 2 July 2025.

Environment and climate change

On 2 July 2025, the European Commission is due to publish its updated 2040 climate target after several months of delays. The goal will be to reduce emissions to 90% below 1990 levels, but the EU is expected to allow countries to use carbon offsets (including those from outside the EU), to meet some of the targets. The new German government is among those who have lobbied for the Commission to allow countries to rely on offsetting to meet targets.

Litigation over a US$20 billion climate fund is likely to progress after a federal judge in Washington DC issued a temporary restraining order to prevent the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from clawing back the funds. The money, issued under the Inflation Reduction Act 2022, had already been assigned to emissions reduction projects across the US, but is held by Citibank. The EPA froze the funds in February 2025, before announcing that the grants were terminated on 11 March 2025. Grantees filed legal action on 8 March 2025, and a federal court ordered on 18 March 2025 that the funds be released pending further litigation.

Carbon taxes and markets

The UK’s consultation on its proposed Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) closes on 3 July 2025. The UK published draft legislation on a CBAM that broadly reflects the EU’s on 24 April. It aims to prevent businesses from moving their operations to jurisdictions with lower carbon taxes and wants the CBAM to come into effect in January 2027.

The EU’s consultation on the future of the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) closes on 8 July 2025. The consultation is part of a review the European Commission promised when the ETS system was set up, and is designed to ensure it is working effectively to reduce emissions across different sectors of the economy.

On 17 April 2025, the UK government launched a consultation on raising the integrity of voluntary carbon and nature markets. The consultation seeks views on implementing the government’s principles for market integrity, focusing on high standards for carbon credit quality and corporate claims. It closes on 10 July 2025.

On 15 May 2025, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) launched a public consultation to align its Sector Standards with new topic standards on biodiversity, climate change and energy. The revisions affect sectors such as oil and gas, coal, agriculture and mining. The GRI is receiving feedback until 13 July 2025.

The deadline for companies to submit Q2 2025 emissions reports under the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) is 31 July 2025. This applies to importers of CBAM-covered goods, who are required to report the embedded emissions of their imports on a quarterly basis through the CBAM Transitional Registry. The number of companies in scope of the CBAM is expected to be dramatically reduced under the Omnibus proposal but the carbon border tax, which is currently in a transitional phase, has not yet been paused.

Energy and infrastructure

US lawmakers hope to pass President Trump’s tax and spending bill by 4 July 2025, including sweeping changes for the US solar and wider power industries, and a rollback of parts of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), President Biden’s landmark climate law. The bill is expected to reshape the tax incentives that have spurred a boom in clean energy infrastructure across the US. While the prospect of reducing energy jobs in red states is spurring a backlash among some Republicans, others are trying to add new taxes on green energy. The debate could delay the bill’s passage.

Sweden’s new model for financing and risk-sharing in nuclear power investments will take effect on 1 August 2025. The framework includes limited state aid through government loans and two-way contracts for difference, supporting up to 5GW of new nuclear capacity.

Modern slavery

From 18 August 2025, large companies selling batteries or battery-operated products containing cobalt, natural graphite, lithium or nickel must implement enhanced due diligence procedures under the EU Batteries Regulation 2023/1542. These companies must ensure their supply chains are free from human rights abuses and environmental degradation while maintaining transparency across their supply chain. However, the EU has proposed delaying the implementation of the Batteries Regulation as part of the Omnibus simplification drive, so this deadline may change.

Jack Barton

Lexology

FINANCE ARTICLES

SOUTH AFRICA

Is the COFI Bill finally kicking in?

The Financial Sector Conduct Authority (“FSCA”) has been steadily refining its regulatory agenda in anticipation of one of the most significant impending legal reforms in the South African financial sector, embodied in the Conduct of Financial Institutions Bill (“COFI Bill)” or (“Bill”).  While the FSCA’s 2025 Three-Year Regulation Plan (covering 1 April 2025 to 31 March 2028) (“Plan”) does not definitively specify precisely when the COFI Bill will take effect as law, it does provide valuable indications of government and the FSCA’s readiness to bring the Bill into force. The Plan provides guidance on the Bill’s projected timeline and the steps required before it becomes operational.

From the outset, it is clear that the COFI Bill remains a top priority for the FSCA as part of its commitment to establishing a more holistic, robust, and customer-focused conduct framework within South Africa’s financial services landscape.  At present, the National Treasury is engaging with a wide array of stakeholders, with the FSCA as a principal partner, to finalise the Bill’s provisions.  Once this drafting work is complete, the Bill must still proceed through Parliament, undergo any required consultation and amendments, and ultimately await Presidential assent before it becomes binding law. This could occur on a staggered schedule, depending on how quickly the Bill progresses through the legislative institutions.

The Plan explains that many of the FSCA’s own initiatives have been intentionally deferred or suspended, so as not to create misalignment between current rules and the framework that will ultimately be implemented under the COFI Bill.  In essence, the FSCA has indicated that it does not wish to introduce sweeping new regulations on particular financial institutions if doing so would be quickly overtaken by the more comprehensive reforms envisioned by the Bill.  For instance, the FSCA has consolidated certain draft requirements for insurance firms, retirement funds, and collective investment scheme managers under the transitional arrangements that will be carried across once the Bill is promulgated.

Given the multi-step parliamentary and consultative processes, it remains difficult to ascribe a firm date to the Bill’s commencement. Several indicators nevertheless provide guidance:

1.     The FSCA has confirmed that the Bill will likely be placed before Parliament once the current drafting phase is complete and the National Treasury has consolidated all input.

2.     Should there be significant delays, the FSCA intends to start implementing frameworks compatible with the future COFI structure in a phased or staggered manner, minimising regulatory uncertainty for financial institutions.

3.     The transitional arrangements for the Bill’s implementation – particularly where the FSCA and the future Prudential Authority mandates overlap – will be crucial to understanding how quickly certain aspects of the Bill can be enforced.

In practical terms, once the Bill completes its passage, it will come into force on a date determined by any transitional provisions in the legislation itself or via subsequent notice in the Government Gazette.  The Plan signals that a large volume of its near-term regulatory projects is either officially on hold or designed to dovetail with the Bill’s new regime and thus become operative shortly after the Bill becomes law.  Consequently, if the parliamentary process proceeds smoothly and without excessive delays, it is plausible that core facets of the Bill could effectively be implemented within the next two to three years.

Until that time, businesses and stakeholders can prepare for the evolving regulatory approach by monitoring key themes in the Plan, including governance reforms, harmonised conduct standards, and a move away from overly prescriptive rules towards a more principle-based system.  The FSCA has also emphasised that the Bill’s ultimate publication and commencement should herald a period of reduced legislative churn.  Instead, the markets will experience a more stable long-term framework, reflecting the COFI Bill’s scope and modern alignment with international best practice.

Thus, while an exact date for the commencement of the COFI Bill remains dependent on ongoing parliamentary processes and coordination between the FSCA and National Treasury, the path towards its implementation is steadily becoming clearer. Stakeholders are strongly encouraged to engage with the FSCA’s progress updates, and to participate in any consultation opportunities so that they are ready to meet the Bill’s requirements as soon as they come into force.

Angela Itzikowitz and Era Gunning

ENSafrica

New Rules for Payment Providers: What You Need to Know about the Draft Directive on Payment Activities

The South African Reserve Bank (“SARB”) has published a draft directive that could dramatically reshape the payments landscape. If you offer any kind of payment service, you may soon need to register with SARB and meet detailed compliance standards.

This forms part of SARB’s broader plan to bring non-bank payment providers into the regulatory fold and ensure the integrity and safety of the national payment system.

Who is affected?

The Draft Directive applies to both banks and non-banks. If you offer any of the “payment activities” listed in Annexure A to the Draft Directive, you’ll need to apply to SARB for authorisation once the Draft Directive is published – even if you’re already registered with the Payments Association of South Africa (“PASA”) as a third-party payment provider (“TPPP”).

The activities listed in Annexure A include:

• third-party payments;
• acquiring of payment transactions;
• providing electronic money;
• operating or participating in payment schemes; and
• money remittance services.

The Draft Directive also purports to regulate closed-loop payment systems, like store cards or branded platforms that only operate within a single ecosystem.

Key compliance requirements

If you perform a payment activity, you will need to apply for authorisation and provide extensive supporting documentation, including:

• details of your company structure, shareholders, and key staff;
• governance, audit, risk and anti-money laundering (“AML”) frameworks;
• a detailed business and operational plan; and
• proof of sufficient capital.

SARB will also supervise compliance, with the power to conduct inspections, access systems and records, and direct corrective action. Non-compliance may result in suspension or revocation of authorisation.

What should you do now?

Public comments on the Draft Directive were due on 16 April 2025. We have yet to see how the Draft Directive will be amended, in light of such comments. However, as it stands, the Draft Directive imposes significant compliance obligations on a range of entities operating in the payments space.

If your organisation is involved in payments, even indirectly, it is essential to assess whether your organisation falls within the scope of the Draft Directive, as it currently stands. The compliance obligations are detailed and potentially resource-intensive. We recommend that impacted businesses start preparing early to understand the implications of potential regulation.

Angela Itzikowitz, Era Gunning and  Amelia Warren

ENSafrica

SOUTH AFRICA

South Africa’s driving licence demerit system gets new launch date

South Africa’s demerit points system for drivers will come into full effect in September 2026, following a phased rollout of the Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences (AARTO) Act starting in December 2025.

This is according to Road Traffic Infringement Agency (RTIA) spokesperson Monde Mkalipi, who outlined the agency’s plan for implementing the new traffic enforcement regime.

The first phase of the rollout begins on 1 December 2025, when AARTO will be introduced in 69 municipalities, including major metros like Cape Town and Johannesburg.

“Most of the metros are included as part of the initial rollout,” said Mkalipi. The agency will expand coverage in two additional waves, one in February and another in April 2026, to include the remaining municipalities.

The RTIA and the Department of Transport believe the AARTO system is necessary to tackle the human behaviours behind most road crashes in the country.

“Research has shown that more than 80% of road crashes are due to human error and thus call for behaviour-changing efforts on our part,” said the Deputy Minister of Transport, Mkhuleko Hlengwa, in his budget vote speech.

He described AARTO as central to the demerit system that systematically aims to contain road user behaviour.

Although the AARTO rollout begins in December 2025, the points demerit system, often seen as the heart of the reform, will only be activated from 1 September 2026.

This system will allocate demerit points for traffic infringements, leading to licence suspensions or cancellations if drivers accumulate too many points.

Learner drivers can only accumulate up to six points before facing a three-month suspension, while fully licensed drivers face suspension at fifteen points.

From December 2025, drivers will initially engage with AARTO’s “elective options,” previously tested in Johannesburg and Tshwane.

“If you receive a traffic infringement, you’ll be expected to resolve it within 32 days and can benefit from a 50% discount,” Mkalipi explained.

For those who miss the 32-day deadline, alternatives include submitting a representation to dispute the fine, nominating another driver, redirecting the infringement, or paying in instalments.

“These five elective options are key features of the system. We will explain these to road users so they know exactly how to respond to infringements,” he said.

AARTO rollout impractical

Mkalipi warned that non-compliance will carry serious consequences. “If you violate traffic laws and don’t act, your driving licence or vehicle licence disc may be blocked from being renewed,” he said.

This includes holders of public driving permits, who will also need to act quickly to avoid penalties. A key objective of the new system is to bring consistency across the country’s fragmented traffic enforcement landscape.

“Currently, the system is fragmented. Cape Town has its own bylaws, which might differ from those of Johannesburg or Tshwane. AARTO brings uniformity,” Mkalipi explained.

The system will also digitise traffic law enforcement to combat corruption. “Currently, most parts of the country use handwritten infringement notices,” Mkalipi said.

“With AARTO, we are moving to electronic devices. When a violation is captured, it is immediately loaded onto a handheld gadget and fed into the system. This will reduce human interference and help eliminate bribery.”

Some municipalities have already begun piloting these systems, and RTIA hopes to phase out paper-based fines entirely. Infringements will eventually be delivered via email and other electronic channels.

While the government has promoted AARTO as a game-changer, some civil society groups are not convinced.

The Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse (OUTA) has previously raised serious concerns, calling the rollout impractical and an administrative burden.

“It does not address the root causes of accidents, the risk of corruption, and administrative cumbersomeness,” OUTA said.

Municipal buy-in is another major challenge. OUTA questioned whether all 245 municipalities and seven metros could realistically be ready for AARTO.

The Automobile Association (AA) echoed these concerns. “We stand by our previous views that the AARTO legislation is geared towards revenue collection and not on promoting safer roads,” it said.

“Introducing legislation will not solve the country’s road safety crisis. This merely creates an impression of action while nothing will change on the ground.”

The AA further noted that there’s no evidence the AARTO pilot in Johannesburg and Tshwane saved any lives.

Despite these criticisms, Mkalipi said the RTIA is committed to public education and ensuring the system brings real safety benefits.

“We are hoping that, with the new system, we can reduce fatalities and promote accountability on the roads,” he said.

Malcolm Libera

Businesstech