EBRAHIM V CONTROLLER OF CUSTOMS & EXCISE 1985 (2) ZLR 1 (S)

EBRAHIM v CONTROLLER OF CUSTOMS & EXCISE 1985 (2) ZLR 1 (S)

Flynote

Customs and Excise Act [Chapter 177] s 178(2) — notice of intended proceedings against Controller of Customs and Excise — purpose of section — need for notice to specify cause of intended action.

Headnote

The Controller of Customs and Excise seized appellant's motor vehicle for an alleged contravention of the Customs and Excise Act [Chapter 177], and the appellant, after notifying the Controller that he intended to institute proceedings based "on a vindicatory action", issued summons for its return. The Controller, however, pleaded in abatement that the appellant had not given him proper notice of the cause of his action as required by s 178(2) of the Customs and Excise Act. On appeal:

Held that the purpose of s 178(2) of the Customs and Excise Act is to enable the Controller to investigate the circumstances of cases that are to be brought against him and decide whether he should settle the claims or resist them. While the approach to s 178(2) ought not to be technical, if its purpose is to be achieved the material facts upon which the validity of a seizure is challenged must be alleged. Merely to inform the Controller that the action will be a vindicatory one is totally inadequate.

Held, further, that in the instant case it was essential for the appellant to have set out the facts relating to his acquisition of the vehicle and those supportive of his contention that it had been imported lawfully into the country. Such information would have put the Controller on his guard and enabled him to conduct an investigation.