Armbruster and Another v Minister of Finance and Others

The first applicant, Michael Hermann Armbruster, was found in possession of foreign currency valued at approximately R102 675 at OR Tambo International Airport while departing South Africa. He could not produce authorisation from an authorised dealer or the Treasury as required under the Exchange Control Regulations. The currency was seized by customs officials and, following representations by the applicant, the Treasury decided not to return the money, relying on Regulation 3(5), which provided for forfeiture of seized foreign currency. Armbruster admitted that he had acquired foreign currency from German tourists rather than authorised dealers and intended to use it to establish a business in the United Arab Emirates. The applicants challenged the forfeiture decision and the constitutional validity of Regulation 3(5).

Leave to appeal was granted. Regulation 3(5) of the Exchange Control Regulations was declared inconsistent with the Constitution to the extent that it provided for automatic forfeiture of seized currency. The Court read in a requirement that the Treasury must exercise a discretion, considering proportionality, before forfeiture. The matter concerning the applicants’ currency was remitted for reconsideration in accordance with the judgment.

This case is significant for clarifying the constitutional limits on statutory forfeiture regimes in South African law. It affirms that even where deprivation of property occurs under a law of general application, it must not be arbitrary and must allow for proportionality and discretion. The judgment reinforces the protection of property rights under section 25 and the role of administrative justice in exchange control enforcement.