Maize Board v Tiger Oats Limited and Others

The Maize Board sued Tiger Oats Limited and related companies in the Transvaal Provincial Division for payment of levies imposed under the repealed Marketing Act 59 of 1968 and the Summer Grain Scheme. The respondents raised a special plea of prescription, alleging that the claims had prescribed after three years. The Maize Board excepted to the special plea, contending that the levies constituted a tax and were therefore subject to a 30-year prescription period under s 11 of the Prescription Act 68 of 1969. The court a quo held that the levies were not a tax and dismissed the exception. The Maize Board then applied late for leave to appeal, seeking condonation. The court a quo dismissed the condonation application on the basis that the dismissal of the exception was not appealable. The Maize Board appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal against the refusal of condonation.

The appeal was dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.

This case authoritatively reaffirms the South African appellate principle that the dismissal of an exception, save for narrow exceptions such as jurisdictional challenges, is not appealable. It promotes certainty in civil procedure and discourages piecemeal appeals, reinforcing the importance of finality as a requirement for appealability. The judgment also clarifies the proper use of Rule 33 procedures where parties seek a final determination of discrete legal issues.