CTP Ltd. and Others v Argus Newspapers Ltd. and Another (215/95) [1996] ZASCA 145 (29 November 1996)

CTP Ltd. and Others v Argus Newspapers Ltd. and Another (215/95) [1996] ZASCA 145 (29 November 1996)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the changes in shareholding and directorships between Argus Holdings and Argus Newspapers did not fundamentally alter the contractual relationship or eliminate the protectable interests underlying the restraint. The Court found that the previous judgment did not bind the parties to rescission upon any change in affiliation, nor did it preclude enforcement of the restraint in the absence of business association. The restraints were negotiated by parties of equal bargaining power to protect reciprocal commercial interests, and their continued enforcement was not contrary to public policy. The appellants failed to demonstrate that the public interest...

Citation
[1996] ZASCA 145
Parties
Appellant: CTP Limited; Appellant: Moolman, Terrence Desmond; Appellant: Coburn, Noel Malcolm; Appellant: Short, Meredith David William; Respondent: Argus Newspapers Limited; Respondent: Omni Media Corporation Limited
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 November 1996
Case Number
215/95
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Rescission of Interdict
Outcome
Appeal upheld; application for rescission of interdict dismissed with costs.
Judges
Marais, Van Heerden, Nestadt, Eksteen, Scott
Legal Topics
Restraint of Trade, Contractual Interdict, Change of Circumstances, Public Policy, Reciprocal Undertakings
Commercial and Corporate Restraint of Trade Contractual Interdict Change of Circumstances Public Policy Reciprocal Undertakings

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CTP Limited

Appellant

Moolman, Terrence Desmond

Appellant

Coburn, Noel Malcolm

Appellant

Short, Meredith David William

Appellant

Argus Newspapers Limited

Respondent

Omni Media Corporation Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Rescission of Interdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether material changes in the relationship between the parties justify rescission of a contractual restraint interdict.
  2. 2 Whether the continued enforcement of the restraint is contrary to public policy given the changed shareholding and directorships.
  3. 3 Whether the previous judgment estops the appellants from contesting enforceability under changed circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the changes in shareholding and directorships between Argus Holdings and Argus Newspapers did not fundamentally alter the contractual relationship or eliminate the protectable interests underlying the restraint. The Court found that the previous judgment did not bind the parties to rescission upon any change in affiliation, nor did it preclude enforcement of the restraint in the absence of business association. The restraints were negotiated by parties of equal bargaining power to protect reciprocal commercial interests, and their continued enforcement was not contrary to public policy. The appellants failed to demonstrate that the public interest...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; application for rescission of interdict dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.
  • First Respondent is ordered to pay the costs of the application for leave to appeal, including the costs of two counsel.