E-toll judgment not ‘precedent setting’

Picture: Herbert Matimba

The Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse (Outa) said the Pretoria High Court judgment on the non-payment of e-tolls had nothing to do with the legality of e-tolls and was not “precedent setting” in any way, as regards the non-payment of e-tolls.

This was in response to Sanral’s spokesperson Vusi Mona’s comment that the judgment set a precedent in that motorists and companies who did not pay their e-toll debt could be taken to court.

Mona said it was an obligation they took seriously as the proof of the default submitted by Sanral was accepted by the court.

“We are confident the default judgment in our favour will be persuasive for other courts when deciding subsequent cases. In a rules-based society where courts are the final arbiters, the judgment moves us forward on this matter,” Mona said.

He urged motorists and companies to pay their debts as this would contribute to future road upgrades.

“Not only is it the right thing to do but there will be consequences if they do not as the high court judgment has underlined.”

But Outa chairperson, Wayne Duvenage, said the default judgment against a company in liquidation did not delve into the merits of e-tolls and was simply a judgment against someone who failed to provide a notice to defend themselves after receiving a summons for non-payment of e-tolls.

“We made contact with the defendant concerned who claims she never received the summons and therefore did not enter into a notice of intention to defend this matter,” Duvenage said.

“Sanral sent out roughly 6000 summonses last year.”

Nondumiso Zwane | nondumisoz@thenewage.co.za