Capri Oro (Pty) Limited and Others v The Commissioner of Customs and Excise and Others

The second appellant arrived at Johannesburg International Airport from overseas carrying 77 kg of jewellery belonging to the third appellant. He intended to travel later the same day to Namibia to offer the jewellery for sale. After receiving permission from a passport control officer to leave the transit area to meet his father, he passed through the green 'nothing to declare' customs channel without declaring the jewellery. Shortly thereafter, the police detained him and seized the jewellery under the Customs and Excise Act 91 of 1964. The following day, additional jewellery was seized from the business premises of the first appellant. The appellants sought the return of the seized goods, contending that the jewellery was not liable to forfeiture.

The applications for condonation were dismissed, and as a result the appeal failed. The appellants were ordered, jointly and severally, to pay the costs of the applications for condonation and the costs of the appeal.

This case clarifies that under South African customs law, goods brought into the Republic must be declared in terms of section 15(1) of the Customs and Excise Act, failing which they are liable to forfeiture under section 87(1), even if no criminal offence is committed. It confirms that intention to re-export goods and the innocence of the owner are irrelevant to forfeiture, reinforcing the strict regulatory nature of customs control and the limited role of courts in interfering with lawful seizures.