Rudolph v Commissioner for Inland Revenue

Officials of the Commissioner for Inland Revenue, acting under written authorisations issued in terms of section 74(3) of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962, searched the home of the first appellant in October 1993 and later, on 22 April 1994, searched the business premises of the second appellant in Johannesburg. A large number of documents were seized and secured in a locked storeroom under the control of the revenue officials. The appellants were allowed supervised access to copy documents. The interim Constitution came into force on 27 April 1994. The appellants launched urgent proceedings challenging the validity of the authorisations and the searches and seizures, alternatively contending that section 74(3) was unconstitutional. After the Witwatersrand Local Division dismissed the application, the Appellate Division referred several constitutional and jurisdictional questions to the Constitutional Court.

The Constitutional Court answered the referred questions by holding that the Constitution was inapplicable, that the Appellate Division had jurisdiction to determine the common-law grounds of invalidity, and that the Constitutional Court had no jurisdiction over those grounds in the circumstances. The appeal was remitted to the Appellate Division to be disposed of in accordance with its own procedures. No order as to costs was made in the Constitutional Court.

The case is significant for confirming the non-retrospective application of the interim Constitution and clarifying that constitutional rights cannot be invoked to challenge searches and seizures completed before the Constitution came into force. It also delineates the jurisdictional boundary between the Constitutional Court and the Appellate Division in relation to common-law administrative-law challenges during the transitional constitutional period.