Atlantic Oil Inland (Pty) Ltd v Calitz and Others (596/20) [2023] ZANWHC 72 (9 June 2023)

Atlantic Oil Inland (Pty) Ltd v Calitz and Others (596/20) [2023] ZANWHC 72 (9 June 2023)

The court found that the first defendant failed to establish locus standi to bring the application to lift the bar on behalf of the Anja Trust. The founding affidavit did not provide sufficient facts or documentation to demonstrate that the first defendant was properly authorised to act as trustee, especially after...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] ZANWHC 72
Parties
Plaintiff: Atlantic Oil Inland (Pty) Ltd; Defendant: Annelize Calitz; Defendant: Annelize Calitz N.O; Defendant: Jan Jacobus Marhinus Calitz N.O; Defendant: Jan Jacobus Marhinus Calitz
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 June 2023
Case Number
596/20
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Opposed Application to Lift Bar Under Rule 27; Counter Application for Irregular Step and Default Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed; point in limine (lack of locus standi) upheld; costs awarded against defendants jointly and severally.
Judges
A Reddy
Legal Topics
Rule 27 Application, Locus Standi, Suretyship, Trust Litigation, Irregular Step, Default Judgment
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Rule 27 Application Locus Standi Suretyship Trust Litigation Irregular Step Default Judgment

Source-derived case record

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Atlantic Oil Inland (Pty) Ltd

Plaintiff

Annelize Calitz

Defendant

Annelize Calitz N.O

Defendant

Jan Jacobus Marhinus Calitz N.O

Defendant

Jan Jacobus Marhinus Calitz

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Opposed Application to Lift Bar Under Rule 27; Counter Application for Irregular Step and Default Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first defendant has locus standi to bring the application to lift the bar on behalf of the Anja Trust.
  2. 2 Whether the withdrawal of the first Rule 27 application was valid and whether the second application constitutes an irregular step or lis pendens.
  3. 3 Whether the defendants have disclosed a bona fide defence to the plaintiff's claims.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the first defendant failed to establish locus standi to bring the application to lift the bar on behalf of the Anja Trust. The founding affidavit did not provide sufficient facts or documentation to demonstrate that the first defendant was properly authorised to act as trustee, especially after the death of the co-trustee. The principles set out in Parker and related cases require that a trust act only through its duly appointed trustees, and the absence of evidence regarding the appointment of a new trustee or authority to act rendered the application fatally defective. The court held that locus standi must be established in limine and that the applicant's failure to...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; point in limine (lack of locus standi) upheld; costs awarded against defendants jointly and severally.

Orders

  • The point in limine is upheld.
  • The first defendant does not have locus standi to have instituted the application.