The High Court in Durban has approved the sale of five upmarket homes in Sandown, Johannesburg, associated with businesswoman Shauwn Mkhize and her family, as Sars moves to recover millions of rands in outstanding taxes.
In an order issued on Monday, Judge Jacqueline Henriques directed that all money generated from the sales be deposited into an interest-bearing trust account managed by the curator bonis.
The court further instructed the South African Revenue Service (Sars) to launch legal proceedings within one month of the order to have the properties or the money raised from their sale declared executable against the tax liabilities of Mkhize and the Zikhulise Group.
Henriques granted the application after Sars argued that the continued upkeep of the properties was placing their value at risk because of rising maintenance bills, unpaid municipal charges and costly security arrangements.
The case follows a preservation order issued on November 21, 2024, in terms of the Tax Administration Act, after Sars pursued substantial unpaid tax obligations linked to Mkhize and the Zikhulise Group.
Sars reported that Mkhize’s personal income tax arrears stood at R13.3 million as of September 19, 2025, while her personal liability for the Zikhulise Group’s tax debt, inclusive of interest, amounted to R112.5 million.
In its latest court bid, the revenue service requested permission to convert the five properties into cash, with the funds to remain under the curator bonis’ control until further proceedings determine whether they can be used to recover the outstanding taxes.
Henriques said Sars had justified the proposed sales by pointing to the growing financial burden of maintaining the properties and the resulting decline in their value.
The expenses identified by Sars included insurance premiums payable twice a year, outstanding municipal bills, maintenance requirements, security personnel and the curator bonis’ fees. Although the respondents were responsible for these costs, Sars was covering them temporarily, the judge noted.
The court heard that the five properties, despite being registered under two separate owners, functioned as one residential unit.
A sworn valuation report commissioned by Sars placed the properties’ combined municipal valuation at R22.831 million.
Their estimated market value was R35 million, while their combined forced-sale value was calculated at R24.5 million.
Municipal records presented to the court showed that four of the five properties had outstanding charges totalling R1.8 million as of October 3, 2025.
Sars also expressed concern that the homes could be damaged or that items inside them might be removed, prompting the curator bonis to arrange for security guards to protect the properties.
The security contract costs R188,000 a month for all five properties, with Sars currently settling the bill.
Henriques said the parties opposing the application had not challenged the factual allegations set out in Sars’ founding affidavit.
Instead of directly disputing the evidence presented by the revenue service, the respondents focused on preliminary legal arguments, the judge said.
She found that their failure to meaningfully contest Sars’ account left the factual basis of the application undisputed.
Henriques rejected the respondents’ objections and concluded that they had not provided sufficient grounds to prevent the requested relief.
The judge consequently authorised the sale of the five properties in accordance with the terms sought by Sars.
