E-toll interdict reasoning questioned in ConCourt

marine1

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 4, 2006
Messages
48,810
You have to be some kind of lawyer to defend the ANC in this (ANC = GVT)
These lawyers have no morals IMO
 

R13...

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2008
Messages
40,475
You have to be some kind of lawyer to defend the ANC in this (ANC = GVT)
These lawyers have no morals IMO
Doesn't that apply to all lawyers? You have lawyers who defend mass murderers and rapists.
 

xumwun

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Messages
2,773
“Government ends up robbing Peter to pay Paul. Where Paul are road users who have claimed this wonderful world-class transport facility, and Peter are the people in other provinces.”

LOL what a load of crap.
SANRAL has said themselves that the money from etolls would be used to fund other projects.
Nevermind that Guateng is already subsidizing other provinces.

The government has never had a problem with "Robbing Peter to pay Paul" before so why now?
 

ChocolateBadger

Expert Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
3,826
I think it said like R3.3 billion was lost so far by e-tolling not running while Bill Gates is helping fund R3.3 billion rand project to develop a water less toilet. Is our economy really comparable to a toilet?
 

Paul_S

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
4,997
LOL what a load of crap.
SANRAL has said themselves that the money from etolls would be used to fund other projects.
Nevermind that Guateng is already subsidizing other provinces.

The government has never had a problem with "Robbing Peter to pay Paul" before so why now?

My thoughts as well.
This is aimed at getting Gauteng motorists to subsidize infrastructure country wide.
Last time I checked SANRAL's road network covers the entire country so this is actually an attempt to rob Paul to pay Peter and not the other way around.

The whole argument of the lack of e-tolling causing harm to the economy is also rubbish! (another news article)
What do they think will happen to the economy when the price of goods goes up and people have even less disposable income because of e-tolling?
Do they want South Africa to go back into a recession?!
 

j4ck455

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
6,935
National Treasury lawyer Jeremy Gauntlett said High Court Judge Bill Prinsloo did not provide adequate reasons for his decision to grant the interdict.

“With respect, what he does… is tick the individual interdict boxes, and to say each time that it [the reason] is there.”

He said it was difficult for the parties to determine how he had come to his conclusions.

“It is the beginning of vagueness.”

With respect, all of the reasons given by Judge Bill Prinsloo (for granting the interdict against etrolling) were easily understood by members of the public who are generally not lawyers.

The problem is clearly that National Treasury lawyer Jeremy Gauntlett lacks basic comprehension skills, someone should check to see if his "lawyer credentials" are aboveboard (obtained without bribery/corruption).
 

spiff

Executive Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
5,580
I think it said like R3.3 billion was lost so far by e-tolling not running while Bill Gates is helping fund R3.3 billion rand project to develop a water less toilet. Is our economy really comparable to a toilet?


there is already a waterless toilet for the poor. this was done in 2007-2008.
the anc turned its back on the project. the inventor and his investors had to foot the bill themselves. I manufactured all five of the injection molds, each weighing in at about 2.5 - 3 tons each.

interesting mayor De Lille was at our premises today revisiting this project?
wonder if they are finally going to implement the waterless toilets?
they are far cleaner, healthier than crapping in a bucket out in the rain, then dumping the **** in your backyard.
 
Top