The run-up to
this judgement can be summarised as follows.
Shoprite was granted grocer’s wine licences in the Eastern Cape between 1989 and 2003. The Eastern
Cape Liquor Act(“Liquor Act) came into force in 2004. It determined that grocer’s wine licences would
be valid only until 2014. However, licence holders could apply before 2009 to convert these licences into licences allowing them to sell all
kinds of liquor on separate premises. Shoprite alleged that this would result in
it being deprived of its property – its liquor licences.
The Concourt
found that a liquor licence qualifies to be regarded as property. Furthermore, that Shoprite was not totally
deprived of this property. Shoprite
still had the chance to convert these licences. In reality, Shoprite
would have to transfer any converted liquor licence to premises outside of its
supermarkets. This would not be practical, as they already have their own liquor stores adjacent (or close) to most of their
supermarkets.
The Concourt
also found that the change in the licensing system affecting supermarkets did
not extinguish any other fundamental constitutional rights or values of the
licence holders. Furthermore, if the change
in the licensing system was found to be rational, there could not be any
arbitrary deprivation of property. It
found that it was rational to change the licensing system in order to simplify it
and that courts should not easily interfere with the choices made by
legislatures.
(Summary by The Licence Co)