Association of Meat Importers and Exporters v International Trade Administration Commission and Others (9233/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 72 (31 January 2024)

begin wrapper begin container begin header begin slogan-floater end slogan-floater - About SAFLII About SAFLII - Databases Databases - Search Search - Terms of Use Terms of Use - RSS Feeds RSS Feeds end header begin main begin center # South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria You are here: SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria >> 2024 >> [2024] ZAGPPHC 72 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## Association of Meat Importers and Exporters v International Trade Administration Commission and Others (9233/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 72 (31 January 2024) Association of Meat Importers and Exporters v International Trade Administration Commission and Others (9233/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 72 (31 January 2024) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPPHC/Data/2024_72.html sino date 31 January 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) Case No: 9233/2022 (1)       REPORTABLE: NO (2)       OF INTEREST TO OTHERS JUDGES: NO (3)       REVISED DATE: 31 JANUARY 2024 SIGNATURE In the matter between: THE ASSOCIATION OF MEAT IMPORTERS AND Applicant EXPORTERS and INTERNATIONAL TRADE ADMINISTRATION First Respondent COMMISSION MINISTER OF TRADE, INDUSTRY & Second Respondent COMPETITION MINISTER OF FINANCE Third Respondent SOUTH AFRICAN REVENUE SERVICES Fourth Respondent SOUTH AFRICAN POULTRY ASSOCIATION Fifth Respondent JUDGMENT RETIEF J 1. The parties before me, at the hearing of the main application, namely the Applicant, the First, Second and Fifth Respondents [Respondents] [collectively, the parties] have all served applications for leave to appeal the judgment and/or order, this includes an application for cross-appeal by the Applicant. To avoid any confusion which may arise as a result of the respective applications filed, I shall retain the reference of each party as they appeared in the main application. 2. I have considered the concise grounds of appeal formulated by the Respondents in their respective applications for leave to appeal as too, the concise grounds relied on by the Applicant in its application for leave to cross appeal. 3. I have read the judgment, reconsidered the reasons and the order and have come to the conclusion that I have no further comments to add. Having said that, if one has regard, not only to the importance of the subject matter upon which I adjudicated, but the importance of its outcome to the respective parties, the Poultry Industry and International Trade relations, the cumulative grounds of appeal and cross-appeal are persuasive. 4. It is for these reasons that the threshold of both section 17(1)(a)(i) and (ii) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 have been met and leave should be granted to all the parties. 5. In the premises, the parties respective applications are successful. I make the following order: 1. The Applicant, the First, Second and Fifth Respondents are granted leave to appeal and/or cross appeal, as the case maybe, directly to the Supreme Court of Appeal. 2. Costs to be costs in the Appeal. L.A. RETIEF JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA Appearances : For the Applicant: Adv.  H Epstein SC Adv. S Tshikila Instructed by: Malatji & Co Attorneys c/o Macintosh, Cross & Farquharson For the First Respondent: Adv E Muller Adv JW Kiarie Instructed by: State Attorney: Pretoria For the Second Respondent: Adv. N H Maenetje SC Adv. M Salukazana Instructed by: State Attorney: Pretoria For the Fifth Respondent: Adv. A Cockrell SC Instructed by: Webber Wentzel c/o Hills Incorporated Judgment granted: 31 January 2024 sino noindex make_database footer start