Arnold and Another v Bird (3171/2016) [2017] ZAKZDHC 30 (31 July 2017)

Arnold and Another v Bird (3171/2016) [2017] ZAKZDHC 30 (31 July 2017)

The court found that the first applicant was in wilful and mala fide contempt of the order of Gorven J dated 21 June 2016. The applicant had knowledge of the order, failed to comply by not depositing all monies into the Standard Bank account, and did not provide a reasonable or credible explanation for missing cash deposits or delayed responses to correspondence. The applicant's explanations were found to be unsatisfactory and not bona fide. The respondent, on the other hand, complied with the order of Moodley J dated 7 July 2016 by providing access to the Standard Bank account, and any delay was due to the bank's FICA requirements, not the respondent's actions. The first applicant's...

Citation
[2017] ZAKZDHC 30
Parties
Applicant: Gareth Ian Arnold; Applicant: Isigidi Trading 413 CC; Respondent: Colin Bird
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 July 2017
Case Number
3171/2016
Procedural Posture
Contempt Application / Opposed Motion; Judgment on Contempt and Related Applications
Outcome
First applicant found in contempt of the order of Gorven J dated 21 June 2016; rule nisi issued regarding sanction; first applicant’s counter-application and contempt application against respondent dismissed; punitive costs ordered against first applicant.
Judges
Henriques
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Interim Relief, Business Partnership Dispute, Bank Account Control, Punitive Costs, Condonation
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Contempt of Court Interim Relief Business Partnership Dispute Bank Account Control Punitive Costs Condonation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gareth Ian Arnold

Applicant

Isigidi Trading 413 CC

Applicant

Colin Bird

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contempt Application / Opposed Motion; Judgment on Contempt and Related Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first applicant was in wilful and mala fide contempt of the order of Gorven J dated 21 June 2016.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent was in contempt of the order of Gorven J requiring provision of transactional access to the Standard Bank account.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent was in contempt of the order of Moodley J dated 7 July 2016 regarding access to the Standard Bank account.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the first applicant was in wilful and mala fide contempt of the order of Gorven J dated 21 June 2016. The applicant had knowledge of the order, failed to comply by not depositing all monies into the Standard Bank account, and did not provide a reasonable or credible explanation for missing cash deposits or delayed responses to correspondence. The applicant's explanations were found to be unsatisfactory and not bona fide. The respondent, on the other hand, complied with the order of Moodley J dated 7 July 2016 by providing access to the Standard Bank account, and any delay was due to the bank's FICA requirements, not the respondent's actions. The first applicant's...

Court Disposition

First applicant found in contempt of the order of Gorven J dated 21 June 2016; rule nisi issued regarding sanction; first applicant’s counter-application and contempt application against respondent dismissed; punitive costs ordered against first applicant.

Orders

  • No order as to costs for the first applicant’s application for condonation for late filing of heads and practice note; applicants’ attorneys not entitled to levy a fee for heads, practice note, or condonation application (does not extend to counsel).
  • First applicant declared to be in contempt of the order granted by Gorven J on 21 June 2016.