Abstract
South African courts have historically been inconsistent in the manner in which they have approached the interpretation of fiscal statutes. Even the introduction of the Constitution in South Africa has not resolved these inconsistencies.
Recently, the Supreme Court of Appeal in the case of Natal Joint Municipal Pension Fund v Endumeni Municipality 2012 3 SA 593 (SCA) took upon itself the task of clarifying how courts should interpret legislation. In this regard, the court concluded that all courts in South Africa should follow a purposive approach when embarking upon the role of statutory interpretation.
The study commences by briefly considering the various theories underlying the different approaches to statutory interpretation including how these approaches have been applied by South African courts in the context of the interpretation of fiscal statutes.
It also considers whether the purposive approach should also be followed by tax courts on the basis that fiscal legislation should not be interpreted any differently to other legislation and whether the contra fiscum rule continues to apply.
The study finds a practical approach to interpreting fiscal provisions which satisfies the requirements of current law.
M.Com.