Gannet Works (Pty) Ltd and Others v Middleton Sue NO and Another

The appellants are companies involved in the manufacture, importation and sale of angling equipment, including bait-carrying drones and remote-controlled boats. On 24 February 2022, the first respondent, the Deputy Director-General for Fisheries Management, issued a public notice stating that the use of motorised devices such as bait-carrying drones, remote-controlled boats and motorised electric reels is prohibited for recreational angling. The appellants alleged that this notice caused significant financial harm to their businesses and contended that neither the Marine Living Resources Act 18 of 1998 nor its regulations prohibit such devices. They sought declaratory relief that the use of these devices is lawful and that the notice was unlawful and of no legal effect. The High Court dismissed the application, leading to an appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.

This judgment clarifies the interpretation of recreational angling under the Marine Living Resources Act and confirms that the method of fishing authorised by a permit is strictly limited to that defined in the regulations. It reinforces a purposive and environmentally protective approach to statutory interpretation in fisheries management and affirms the regulatory authority of the Minister and departmental officials in implementing conservation-oriented fishing controls.