UK citizen's temporary firearm permit denied by Pretoria High Court
Image: Beretta Gallery
A professional clay target shooter's application, which sought continued and uninterrupted temporary authorisation for the possession of a firearm, has failed in the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria.
Aggrieved by the refusal, the firearm owner appealed against a decision made by the chairperson of the Firearms Appeal Board and the Registrar of Firearms.
The man, a professional clay target sport shooter, is a United Kingdom citizen who carries a UK passport with a critical skill visa, also sought that the court grant him a temporary permit under Section 21 of the Firearms Control Act for the possession of a Beretta SL3.
His temporary permit, which he tried to renew in 2020, had been renewed on an annual basis since 2017.
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Next
Stay
Close ✕
He argued that the refusal harms his rights and has a direct external legal effect as it impacts directly and immediately on his right to possess a firearm.
The firearm owner attempted to extend his temporary permit and stated in his justification for a temporary application: 'I solely wish to be able to protect my wife from harm in the form of unlawful criminal attacks directed against me at our home or in public.'
According to court documents, he is married to a South African citizen and has been residing in the country since July 20, 2011, but has never applied for South African citizenship.
Further in his justification arguments, the man stated that due to his non-citizenship, he cannot apply for a self-defence firearms licence under S15 of the Firearms Control Act and needed the temporary permit 'as I have a right under the Act to request a firearms licence, in this case for self-defence'.
In refusing his application, the registrar said the man's application for the temporary permit had lacked motivation and did not convince the registrar of his stated need.
The registrar ruled: 'It is clear from your motivation that you need this firearm for permanent use with a temporary authorisation. You failed to provide a temporary nature for which this firearm is required.'
He then applied to the Firearms Appeal Board, which also refused his application.
The appeal board ruled: 'The mere fact that you were issued a temporary authorisation more than once indicates that the authorisation was no longer for a temporary purpose. You seem to be issued with a firearm licence, or rather own a firearm under the disguise of a temporary authorisation of which was not the purpose intended by the legislature through this section. The provisions of the (Firearms) Act cannot be circumvented by issuing temporary authorisations.
'You have in any way not indicated to the board whether you have a pending permanent residence application upon acquisition, you would then apply for a licence in terms of the provisions of this Act,' the court documents read.
Arguing against the rulings of the two authorities, the man said that neither the appeal board nor the registrar properly brought their mind to bear on the consideration of what they were asked to consider.
He also regarded it 'striking' that the decision of the appeal board was 'significantly and materially discrepant'.
Judge Nosipho Khumalo, however, agreed with the rulings by the two authorities and said that the procedure followed was lawful and fair.
'The applicant has failed to show that the respondents were irrational in refusing his application for a temporary authorisation cum S13 licence to possess a firearm or that the decisions were indeed materially influenced by an error of fact or law as he alleged.
'In my view, the registrar exercised his powers within the realm of the applicable law and functions entrusted to him by the Act, having taken the relevant factors and law into consideration.'
chevon.booysen@inl.co.za
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

The Star
7 hours ago
- The Star
R446,000 cash and Toyota Fortuner forfeited as driver fails to explain money's origins
Jonisayi Maromo | Published 5 hours ago The High Court in Limpopo has granted a forfeiture order for a cash amount of R446,000 and a Toyota Fortuner sport utility vehicle, which were seized by police. The Hawks' asset forfeiture investigation unit and the National Prosecuting Authority's asset forfeiture unit (AFU) worked tirelessly to ensure the forfeiture of the money and the vehicle. 'This emanates from the arrest conducted by members of the South African Police Service attached to Musina in 2024. On 4 July 2024, police conducted a stop and search operation along the N1 road in Musina,' said Warrant Officer Lethunya Mmuroa, provincial spokesperson for the Hawks in Limpopo. During the operation, the police officers stopped the Toyota Fortuner which was driven by a foreign national. 'During a search, police found a plastic bag that contained South African bank notes underneath blankets inside the boot. Police interviewed the driver, and he failed to give a clear explanation for carrying the large amount of money inside the vehicle,' said Mmuroa. The driver was immediately arrested and the money was seized. The Hawks' asset forfeiture investigation unit was consulted for asset investigation. 'After completion of the investigations, the Hawks referred the matter to the National Prosecuting Authority's asset forfeiture unit for further handling. Following court processes, the High Court in Limpopo granted a preservation order for the Toyota Fortuner and the money in February, before the forfeiture order was granted last week. 'The cash was deposited into the criminal asset recovery account on 29 July. The forfeited Toyota Fortuner is about to be sold on auction,' said Mmuroa. Earlier this year, IOL reported that a 49-year-old man was arrested on charges of money laundering after being found in possession of about R1.2 million in cash. At the time, provincial police spokesperson in Mpumalanga, Lieutenant Colonel Jabu Ndubane, said the arrested man had allegedly tried to bribe police officers after the money was found. 'This achievement is the result of the dedication by members deployed for Operation Vala Umgodi, and the man was nabbed on 16 March 2025 at Tonga near Komatipoort,' said Ndubane. She said police officers received a tip-off about a man who was allegedly in possession of an unlicenced firearm. 'They then responded swiftly and followed the information, and upon arrival at Tonga View, they found the owner of the house and conducted a search and it was during that time when they discovered the large sum of money hidden under the bed as well as inside the wardrobe,' said Ndubane. 'The astute members continued searching in other rooms where they further found a bag full of money. It was during the process when the man tried his luck to bribe the police officials with R50,000, but his attempts failed dismally.' Ndubane said the money amounted to R1.2 million in banknotes and coins, while there was also Mozambican currency. [email protected] IOL News Get your news on the go, click here to join the IOL News WhatsApp channel.


The South African
8 hours ago
- The South African
Man sentenced to 25 years' imprisonment for murder of partner
A man was sentenced to 25 years' imprisonment for the murder of his partner at the Victoria West Regional Court, Northern Cape. The 37-year-old Jan Jonkers brutally murdered Charlene Tieties (31) at their residence in Kimberley. Jonkers assaulted and stabbed Tieties with a knife and she was immediately rushed to the hospital, where she succumbed to her injuries. According to a police statement, Jonkers fled the scene after the incident but was later captured on the same day. He applied for bail but was denied and sentenced. In another similar incident in Kimberley, a 35-year-old man was given a double life sentence for the rape and murder of 21-year-old Thobeka Bosman. Selby George raped and strangled Bosman. The deceased's half-naked body was found under a bridge on Snyman Street in the same area. George was arrested shortly after and was sentenced at the Kimberley High Court on Thursday, 1 August 2025. Four suspects were arrested for the murder of a mother (34) and her 2-year-old daughter, who went missing in May this year. Following an intensive search, SAPS Thohoyandou intervention Team, Thohoyandou Detectives and the Provincial Missing Person Team discovered the decapitated bodies of the two victims. The South African reached out to Colonel Malesela Ledwaba about the location where the bodies were discovered, but has not received a response yet. Additionally, one of the victims is alleged to be the partner of the deceased mother. The motive behind the murder is unknown. The first two suspects, Tshilidzi Phalandwa(43)and Balangani Sedzani Tshivhombedze (32), appeared before the Vuwani Magistrate's Court on Friday, 1 August 2025 and were remanded in custody as the case was postponed to 12 August 2025. The two other suspects, a 55-year-old man and a traditional healer (38), were arrested a few days later. Police discovered the missing heads of the two victims at the traditional healer's residence. Both suspects will appear before the Thohoyandou Magistrate's Court on Monday, 4 August 2025, over murder charges. In addition, a charge of possession of human tissue will be handed over against the traditional healer. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.


The South African
11 hours ago
- The South African
Here's why it might be difficult for Donald Trump to pardon Diddy
Two months after Diddy was found guilty of two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution, reports suggested that US President Donald Trump may grant him a pardon. Recent updates indicate that the US President is re-evaluating his stance on the matter. Here's what the US President had to say regarding the potential pardon. In May 2025, US President Trump first suggested the possibility of pardoning Diddy. Although the rapper had escaped sex-trafficking and racketeering charges, he was found guilty of two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution. During his statement at the Oval Office, Trump mentioned that he would look into the matter and that he would be objective. By late July 2025, a source from the administration revealed that Trump was 'seriously considering' a pardon for the rapper. This would have been exceptional news for the rapper and all of those who support him. It appears though that Trump may be reconsidering granting Diddy a pardon. Trump recently revealed that some of his previous interactions with Diddy have led him to rethink the pardon. During an interview with Newsmax on 1 August 2025, Trump shared that his relationship with Diddy had been amicable until the 2020 presidential election. This is what Trump had to say about the nature of his relationship with the rapper and where he stands regarding the pardon: I was very friendly with him. I got along with him great. Seemed like a nice guy, I didn't know him well. When I ran for office, he was very hostile. It's hard, we're human beings. We don't like to have things cloud our judgment, right? But when you knew someone and you were fine and then you run for office and he made some terrible statements. It's more difficult. Makes it more, I'm being honest, makes it more difficult to do. What are the statements that Diddy made that left a bad taste in Donald Trump's mouth, you ask? During an interview with Charlamagne tha God in October 2020, Diddy expressed his candid feelings concerning Trump's re-election. He emphasised the need to keep figures like Trump out of power, suggesting that white men should be removed from the political landscape. Judging by the interview, it was clear that Diddy was no fan of Trump's personally or in regard to his presidency. Given Diddy's outspoken criticism, it's understandable why Trump might hesitate to consider any form of clemency for the rapper. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 0211. Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.