South Africa\u2019s High Court has defined Bitcoin as \u2018money\u2019 and \u2018capital\u2019, clearing the way for the country\u2019s central bank to regulate the export of cryptocurrency.<\/p>\n
The Gauteng Division of the South African High Court has ruled that cryptocurrency, and specifically Bitcoin, is both money and capital, limiting the ability of South Africans to trade in the currency without official authorisation and departing from an earlier decision by the High Court.<\/p>\n
Giving his ruling on 1 June in Mangundhla & Dangaiso v South African Reserve Bank, Judge Stuart Wilson departed from what he called the \u201cclearly wrong\u201d 2025 decision by the Pretoria branch of the Gauteng Division in Standard Bank of South Africa v South African Reserve Bank, which had taken the opposite position.<\/p>\n
Whereas the Standard Bank ruling held that cryptocurrency\u2019s inherently digital nature did not meet the definition of money, Judge Wilson instead focused on its purpose and use, writing: \u201cTo the extent that cryptocurrency is a financial asset that holds value and is used as a medium of exchange through which capital can be taken from within South Africa and placed beyond its borders, it does not matter that it may not be legal tender (in other words fiat currency), or that it exists as an entry on a digital ledger.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
Capital decision<\/p>\n
Applicants (claimants) Square Mangundhla\u00a0and Fungai Dangaiso brought the case against the South African Reserve Bank (SARB), its deputy governor and the minister of finance.<\/p>\n
Mangundhla traded on the online cryptocurrency platform Luno, using Dangaiso\u2019s account when he reached the permissible limit for trades on his own account.<\/p>\n
While he made legal trades between 2015 and 2017, from 2018 to 2020, he transferred 1680 Bitcoin purchased in South Africa to wallets accessed through cryptocurrency exchanges abroad.<\/p>\n
SARB, the country\u2019s central bank, categorised these transactions as the export of Bitcoin and their rand value in contravention of the Export Control Regulations, and ordered Mangundhla to forfeit ZAR 6 million (GBP 274,000).<\/p>\n
Wilson determined that capital \u201cmeans any financial asset that is capable of holding value or being used as a medium of exchange\u201d, adding that \u201ceven if capital is given the relatively narrow definition of any financial asset that is capable of holding value or being used as a medium of exchange, cryptocurrency is certainly capital\u201d.<\/p>\n
He rejected an argument that bitcoin\u2019s intangible nature put it outside of this definition, saying: \u201cIt seems to me that Bitcoin is plainly capital in the sense that it is a financial asset that is capable of holding value and being used as a medium of exchange,\u201d noting that Bitcoin can be used to purchase rand and is accepted by merchants as currency.<\/p>\n
Wilson further found that the Bitcoin had been exported once it was \u201cplaced beyond the Reserve Bank\u2019s jurisdiction\u201d and as such the regulations applied, rejecting a further defence under the\u00a0 Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA).<\/p>\n
Money, money, money<\/p>\n
The applicants had also argued that the forfeiture should not apply to the currency held in the Luno wallets on the grounds that the regulations only allow for the seizure of money, but Judge Wilson also rejected this argument, writing that \u201cBitcoin\u2019s general characteristics bring it well within any sensible conception of money\u201d on the basis that it can be converted into fiat currency and used to purchase goods and services.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn my view, Bitcoin is clearly money. The Bitcoin was correctly subject to forfeiture,\u201d he concluded.<\/p>\n
Mangundhla and Dangaiso were represented by Cape Town-based firm JM Attorneys, instructing advocates Eloize Eksteen SC and Anneline Roestorf.<\/p>\n
SARB was represented by law firm GMI Attorneys, instructing Werner L\u00fcderitz SC, Ernst Kromhout and Katlego Moloisane.<\/p>\n
Crypto assets were regulated by South Africa by bringing them under the oversight of the Financial Sector Conduct Authority in 2022<\/a>. That made it one of several African countries to legalise and regulate digital assets in the past few years, including Ghana<\/a>, Nigeria<\/a>, Central African Republic<\/a> and Morocco<\/a>.<\/p>\n The Gauteng Division is the forum for an ongoing challenge<\/a> to the South African Legal Sector Code, brought in April by three law firms who argue that its racial transformation objectives are unworkable.<\/p>\n