A Penglides (Pty) Ltd and Another v Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries and Another

The first appellant held a long-term large pelagic longline fishing right and relied on foreign-flagged vessels through charter arrangements. After the Department refused its application to temporarily substitute a nominated foreign vessel, the appellant lodged an internal appeal to the Minister under s 80 of the Marine Living Resources Act 18 of 1998. The appeal was served on the Department on 19 June 2017. The Minister dismissed the appeal, relying in part on a finding that it was lodged two days late. The High Court upheld this preliminary point, holding that the appeal was out of time and that it therefore lacked jurisdiction to consider the substantive challenges to the conditions imposed on the use of foreign vessels. The appellants appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal, disputing the computation of the 30‑day appeal period where the Department’s offices were closed on the final day.

The appeal was upheld with costs. The order of the High Court dismissing the application was set aside, and the matter was remitted to the High Court for determination of the substantive relief.

The case clarifies the computation of statutory time periods in South African administrative law where compliance is impossible due to the closure of government offices. It reinforces a purposive, fairness‑based approach to time limits and confirms that litigants are entitled to the full benefit of prescribed periods.