Poultry body sues for egg levy

THE South African Poultry Association claims it is owed almost R900 000 by a Winterton farm for not paying levies on eggs packaged and sold between November 2009 and March 2013.

But the farm says the claim is prescribed, which means it is not legally bound to pay the debt as the time frame for doing so has passed. It also says the Ukhahlamba Poultry Farm is not an entity, as defined in government notices, which is liable to pay the levy sought.

The case came before the Pietermaritzburg High Court yesterday and a date is to be set to determine questions of law and whether the farm owes the money.

The claim said that in October 2009, the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries introduced a levy relating to packed chicken eggs. It was the intention that the egg producer selling eggs for commercial use should be liable for payment of the levy.

The association had been appointed as the administrator entrusted with the implementation and enforcement of laws.

The claim said the Winterton farm had bought packaging material from a supplier for the sole purpose of selling chicken eggs for commercial use.

The supplier had regularly forwarded the association’s appointee with information on the egg packaging sold to the farm and the appointee had issued the farm with monthly invoices of the levies payable.

The levy should have been paid to the association, or the supplier, who would in turn pay the association. The farm failed to pay R872 346 in total.

In reply, court papers said more than three years had lapsed from the date when the alleged claims arose to the amounts claimed. The claim was prescribed.

The farm denied that the constitution empowered the association to act as a levy administrator, but admitted that the packaging was bought. Failure and refusal to pay was also admitted.

While the main issues would be decided later, a consent order was made that the farm was a producer of eggs and not a seller or manufacturer of packaging material.

It was also agreed between the parties that there was no correlation between the quantity of packaging material bought and the quantity of eggs produced.