• Dangerous games

    Employers' body Neasa is playing a potentially dangerous game, says Terry Bell.

  • Rational thinking

    All players should first consider the net result of their actions, says Leopold Scholtz.

  • Telkom's property poser

    BEE may be hindering Telkom's plans to offload redundant real estate, says Gugu Lourie.

Data provided by iNet BFA
Loading...
See More

Judgment day for Gauteng e-tolls

Sep 20 2012 07:38 Sapa

Thousands protest against e-tolling in Gauteng. (AFP)

Related Articles

E-tolls: State not fighting public

Costs not enough to halt e-toll project

Reasons for e-toll halt vague - lawyer

Bill paves way for e-tolling

ConCourt set for e-toll showdown

E-toll judgement reserved

 

Johannesburg - Gauteng motorists will hear on Thursday whether e-tolling will go ahead, when the Constitutional Court decides whether to overturn an interim interdict preventing e-tolling.

The high court in Pretoria granted the Opposition to Urban Tolling Alliance (Outa) an interdict on April 28, ruling that a full review needed to be carried out before electronic tolling of Gauteng's highways could be put into effect.

The interdict prevented the SA National Roads Agency Limited (Sanral) from levying or collecting e-tolls pending the outcome of a judicial review.

Sanral and National Treasury appealed the court order.

Sanral argued that delays in the project, due to the court's order, prevented it from paying off debts incurred in building gantries.

National Treasury lawyer Jeremy Gauntlett said High Court Judge Bill Prinsloo did not provide adequate reasons for his decision to grant the interdict.

Outa's lawyer Alistair Franklin argued that Sanral's choice of e-tolling as a method of funding caused it more damage than the court order.

He said the interdict was not the cause of "irreparable harm" to the road agency.

It rather suffered "self-imposed" harm by not looking at alternative funding models, Franklin said.

Sanral lawyer David Unterhalter SC said the costs of collection for e-tolling should have been examined holistically, but that the rate of non-compliance was not a proper reason for a review of the project.

He submitted that there were measures to manage deviance.

Unterhalter admitted that there were mistakes and faults with the system, but said it was ready to be introduced.


*Follow Fin24 on Twitter, Facebook, Google+ and Pinterest.


 
NEXT ON FIN24X

 
 
 

Read Fin24’s Comments Policy

24.com publishes all comments posted on articles provided that they adhere to our Comments Policy. Should you wish to report a comment for editorial review, please do so by clicking the 'Report Comment' button to the right of each comment.

Comment on this story
41 comments
Add your comment
Comment 0 characters remaining
 

Company Snapshot

We're talking about:

Small Business

A cash flow crunch often occurs in small businesses trying to balance cash coming in with cash going out. Watch this video to help you improve.
 
 

No need to keep up with the Joneses

Fin24 users provide their own personal tips on how to save money instead of trying to keep up with the Joneses.

 
 

Start saving...

Where can you stash your cash?
Time the key for retirement saving
Dummy's guide to saving
Save money with affordable account

Money Clinic

Money Clinic
Do you have a question about your finances? We'll get an expert opinion.
Click here...
Loading...