Primary briefing · Gazette
high impact 54922 · R. 7646 · 2026-06-30
New AARTO Regulations commence 1 July 2026 — demerit points system now operational
Effective from
01 Jul 2026
The Minister of Transport has made comprehensive new Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences Regulations, 2026 (GN R. 7646), repealing the 2008 AARTO Regulations in their entirety and commencing on 1 July 2026. The regulations operationalise the national demerit points system with a 15-point disqualification threshold, prescribe detailed infringement notice procedures (including electronic service), set a 60-day deadline for service of infringement notices from the date of commission, require payment or election of options within 32 days of service, introduce instalment payment structures (5 instalments up to R2 000, 10 instalments above R2 000), and establish rehabilitation programmes for habitual infringers. Schedule 3 categorises thousands of offences with corresponding charge codes, penalty amounts, discounts, and demerit points.
Who is affected
Fleet operators and vehicle ownersTransport and logistics companiesRoad freight operatorsPublic transport operators (buses, taxis, minibuses)Employers of professional driversMunicipal and provincial traffic enforcement authoritiesLegal practitioners advising on road traffic offences What this means for practitioners
Fleet operators must immediately review the 15-point demerit disqualification threshold and new penalty schedules to assess exposure across driver pools
Update internal driver management and compliance policies to reflect the 32-day payment/election window and instalment payment structures
Ensure systems can receive and process electronically served infringement notices under the new regulations
Brief drivers and transport staff on the demerit points system, rehabilitation programme eligibility, and consequences of exceeding the 15-point threshold
Legal advisers should familiarise themselves with the new representation and appeal procedures prescribed in the 2026 Regulations
Primary briefing · Judgment
high impact Constitutional Court of South Africa · 2026-06-30
BNP Paribas v Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC v Competition Commission of South Africa v Bank of America Europe Designated Activity Company and Others
The Competition Commission prosecuted an alleged single overarching conspiracy (SOC) among numerous local and foreign banks to manipulate the USD/ZAR exchange rate from 2007 to at least September 2013, in contravention of section 4(1)(b) of the Competition Act. Three consolidated applications for leave to appeal reached the Constitutional Court, raising questions about extraterritorial jurisdiction, pleading standards, res judicata, and post-referral joinder of respondents.
The court held: Rogers J, writing unanimously, refused BNP Paribas leave to appeal; granted Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC leave and set aside its joinder (finding the Commission had not established a proper basis for joining CSS post-referral); and partially upheld the Commission's appeal by reinstating JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A. and Standard Americas Incorporated as respondents while otherwise dismissing the Commission's appeal. The Court held that res judicata and peremption barred the Commission from re-litigating the earlier CAC I interpretation of section 3(1), endorsed the adequate connecting factors test for personal jurisdiction over foreign respondents, adopted EU Team Relocations principles for pleading an SOC (requiring a common anti-competitive objective, intentional participation, and actual or constructive knowledge), and confirmed that post-referral joinder is permissible but requires proper initiation of the complaint against the joined party.
Legal impact: This judgment authoritatively develops South African competition law in several respects: it entrenches res judicata and peremption as bars to the Commission re-opening settled jurisdictional findings; it adopts EU-derived SOC pleading standards requiring proof of a common anti-competitive objective, intentional participation, and knowledge; it confirms the adequate connecting factors test for personal jurisdiction over foreign entities; and it constrains post-referral joinder by requiring proper complaint initiation. Defence counsel in cartel proceedings can now rely on these principles to resist jurisdictional overreach and inadequately pleaded conspiracy allegations, while the Commission must ensure its referral affidavits meet the articulated exception test.
Who is affected
Competition law practitionersInternational and domestic banks facing Competition Commission proceedingsIn-house counsel at financial institutions with South African market exposureForeign companies subject to South African competition jurisdictionThe Competition Commission (prosecutorial strategy) What this means for practitioners
Defence counsel in pending or future cartel proceedings should assess whether res judicata or peremption arguments apply to previously decided jurisdictional questions
Review referral affidavits against the SOC pleading standard now endorsed by the Constitutional Court: common anti-competitive objective, intentional participation, and actual or constructive knowledge
Foreign entities facing Competition Commission proceedings should evaluate whether the adequate connecting factors test for personal jurisdiction is met on the facts of their case
The Commission and respondents in the ongoing forex manipulation case must comply with the operative orders, including the setting aside of CSS's joinder and reinstatement of JPM Bank and SAI