Dayan v Dayan (014482/09) [2011] ZAGPJHC 50 (13 May 2011)

Dayan v Dayan (014482/09) [2011] ZAGPJHC 50 (13 May 2011)

The court held that the application before it was solely for making the arbitration award an order of court, and there was no counter-application to set aside or challenge the award. The underlying transaction was not a credit agreement as defined by the National Credit Act, as it was not interest-bearing and was entered into by half-brothers in a close familial relationship, thus excluded from the Act by section 4(2)(b). The arbitrator was not functus officio after making interim awards, as only the final ruling constituted the award. The appeal was dismissed as there was no basis to interfere with the order making the arbitration award an order of court.

Citation
[2011] ZAGPJHC 50
Parties
Appellant: Ariel Dayan; Respondent: Dov Dayan
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 May 2011
Case Number
014482/09
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Order Making Arbitration Award an Order of Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Lamont, Tsoka, Bizos
Legal Topics
Arbitration Award Enforcement, Credit Agreement Definition, Arm S Length Transaction, Costs on Appeal
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Arbitration Award Enforcement Credit Agreement Definition Arm S Length Transaction Costs on Appeal

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ariel Dayan

Appellant

Dov Dayan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Order Making Arbitration Award an Order of Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award should be made an order of court.
  2. 2 Whether the underlying transaction constituted a credit agreement under the National Credit Act.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator was functus officio after making interim awards.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the application before it was solely for making the arbitration award an order of court, and there was no counter-application to set aside or challenge the award. The underlying transaction was not a credit agreement as defined by the National Credit Act, as it was not interest-bearing and was entered into by half-brothers in a close familial relationship, thus excluded from the Act by section 4(2)(b). The arbitrator was not functus officio after making interim awards, as only the final ruling constituted the award. The appeal was dismissed as there was no basis to interfere with the order making the arbitration award an order of court.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.