Primary briefing · Gazette
high impact 54678 · R. 7472–R. 7480 · 2026-05-15
SARS publishes nine Customs & Excise schedule amendments — fuel levies, safeguard duties, steel rebates
Effective from
15 May 2026
Regulation Gazette No. 11995 (Government Gazette 54678) publishes nine notices (R. 7472–R. 7480) amending Schedules 1, 2, 4 and 6 to the Customs and Excise Act, 1964. Key changes include two-stage fuel levy rate adjustments — effective 3 June 2026 (R. 7476) and 1 July 2026 (R. 7475, setting petrol at 429c/li and diesel at 416c/li) — affecting the entire downstream petroleum chain. Safeguard duties on imports originating in or imported from Indonesia are extended through 1 May 2027 (R. 7474) and from 2 May 2027 to 1 May 2028 (R. 7473). New duty rebates on specified iron and steel products (R. 7477) are conditional on ITAC-specific permits and proof that the products are unavailable in the SACU market. Customs duty rates on wheat and wheat flour are also updated (Schedule 1), and Schedule 6 refund provisions are amended for electricity generation and rail. Several notices take effect on the date of publication (15 May 2026).
Who is affected
Fuel producers and distributorsImporters and customs brokersSteel and iron manufacturers and downstream usersAgricultural millers and grain tradersMining companiesElectricity generators and rail infrastructure operators What this means for practitioners
Fuel sector clients must update pricing and levy calculations for the 3 June 2026 and 1 July 2026 commencement dates
Importers of Indonesian goods must apply safeguard duty rates immediately (R. 7474 effective now through 1 May 2027) and note the successor rate period from 2 May 2027 to 1 May 2028
Steel and iron importers seeking duty rebates under R. 7477 must obtain ITAC-specific permits and demonstrate SACU market unavailability
Grain traders and millers should review updated wheat and flour duty rates effective 15 May 2026
Customs brokers should update tariff schedules across all affected headings immediately
Primary briefing · Judgment
medium impact Western Cape High Court, Cape Town · 2026-05-15
Pratt v Lactalis South Africa (Pty) Ltd
A former sales executive and prescribed officer of Lactalis South Africa concluded a mutual separation agreement containing non-reliance and full-and-final-settlement clauses. He had not disclosed a secret financial arrangement — loans at 15% per month interest — with an entity linked to a Lactalis customer, creating a conflict of interest. After discovering the arrangement, Lactalis rescinded the separation agreement. The executive sued for payment under the agreement.
The court held: The court dismissed the executive's claim and declared the rescission valid. Applying the Absa Bank v Fouche duty-to-speak test, the court held that the conflict of interest fell within the executive's exclusive knowledge and was information that honest men would mutually recognise should be communicated. His non-disclosure was deliberate, intended to deceive, and knowingly in breach of his fiduciary duty. The non-reliance clause could not protect him because, on grounds of public policy, the law will not recognise an undertaking by which a party binds himself to condone fraudulent conduct.
Legal impact: Confirms in a modern employment-exit context that the fraud exception to non-reliance clauses remains robust: no contractual mechanism — including full-and-final-settlement wording — can insulate a party who fraudulently conceals material information. For prescribed officers and senior employees, the fiduciary duty to disclose conflicts of interest extends to the point of concluding a separation agreement. Employers can rescind exit agreements where the counterparty's fraud is established, even after payment.
Who is affected
Employers concluding mutual separation or settlement agreementsSenior executives and prescribed officers under the Companies ActIn-house counsel advising on employment exits and conflict-of-interest policiesCompanies with B-BBEE enterprise development programmes involving customer relationships What this means for practitioners
Review separation agreement templates to ensure conflict-of-interest disclosure warranties are included as express conditions precedent, not merely representations
Ensure conflict-of-interest policies require disclosure up to and including the date of any exit agreement
Where undisclosed conflicts are suspected post-separation, consider rescission as a live remedy — this judgment confirms it is available notwithstanding non-reliance clauses