Primary briefing · Gazette
high impact 55062 · R. 7734 · 2026-07-23
42.04% safeguard duty on steel fastener imports from 24 July 2026
Effective from
24 Jul 2026
Government Notice R. 7734, issued under section 57 of the Customs and Excise Act, 1964, amends Part 3 of Schedule No. 2 to impose a 42.04% safeguard duty on imports of bolt ends and screw studs (tariff heading 7318.15.41), screw studding (7318.15.42), and hexagon nuts (7318.16.30), excluding stainless steel and aircraft-identifiable items. The duty applies to imports from all countries except a lengthy list of excluded (mostly developing) nations, meaning imports from China, the EU, and other developed economies are caught. The measure runs from 24 July 2026 to 23 July 2027.
Who is affected
Importers of steel fasteners (bolts, screws, nuts)Customs brokers and clearing agentsManufacturing companies using imported fastenersConstruction and engineering firmsDistributors and wholesalers of hardware and fasteners What this means for practitioners
Immediately verify whether source countries for bolt ends, screw studs, screw studding, and hexagon nuts fall within the exclusion list or are subject to the 42.04% duty
Update customs declarations and landed-cost models for affected tariff headings from 24 July 2026
Assess whether alternative sourcing from excluded (developing) countries is feasible to mitigate the duty impact
Review existing supply contracts for price-adjustment or force-majeure provisions triggered by new duties
Primary briefing · Judgment
medium impact High Court (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg) · 2026-07-23
Du Plessis v Cornelius and Others
The plaintiff, an unregistered beneficial owner who held a 25% interest in a group of companies and close corporations through a nominee arrangement, brought a single action seeking recognition and registration of those interests together with statutory oppression and buy-out relief. The defendants excepted, arguing the plaintiff lacked standing to claim oppression relief before registration and that the pleading was vague.
The court held: The court dismissed the exception. It held that Barnard v Carl Greaves Brokers permits a claimant to seek registration and consequential statutory remedies in the same proceedings, that Smyth v Investec Bank Ltd distinguished but did not overrule Barnard, and that nothing in the statutory language limits oppression relief to conduct occurring only after registration. The rectification claim was not vague because alternative pleading is permissible. Defendants were ordered to plead within 20 days and to pay costs on Scale C.
Legal impact: Confirms the Barnard pathway: beneficial owners in nominee disputes need not first obtain registration in separate proceedings before seeking oppression relief. Clarifies that Smyth did not close this door. Practitioners can now plead combined registration-and-oppression claims with greater confidence, and wrongdoers cannot shield themselves by delaying registration of the beneficial owner.
Who is affected
Commercial litigators handling nominee and beneficial-ownership disputesBeneficial owners holding interests through nomineesShareholders and members of close corporations and private companiesFamily business participants in ownership disputes What this means for practitioners
In nominee-arrangement disputes, consider pleading registration and statutory oppression relief in a single action rather than sequential proceedings
Note that pre-registration oppressive conduct is actionable — gather evidence of such conduct even where the client is not yet registered
Review existing pleadings in pending beneficial-ownership matters to assess whether combined claims should be added