De Wet and Another v Khammissa and Others (358/2020) [2021] ZASCA 70 (4 June 2021)

De Wet and Another v Khammissa and Others (358/2020) [2021] ZASCA 70 (4 June 2021)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Master of the High Court became functus officio upon communicating the first decision not to appoint the appellants as liquidators and issuing the relevant certificate of appointment. There was no statutory provision authorizing the Master to revoke or alter that decision. The requirements for finality were met, and the first decision was irrevocable. Consequently, the second decision to appoint the appellants was invalid and a nullity. The respondents, as parties directly affected by the Master’s decisions, had locus standi at common law to challenge the second decision. The court found that the review application was properly grounded in...

Citation
[2021] ZASCA 70
Parties
Appellant: Gert Louwrens Steyn De Wet; Appellant: Johan Francois Engelbrecht; Respondent: Sumaiya Abdool Gafaar Khammissa; Respondent: Bethuel Billyboy Mahlatsi; Respondent: Keheditse Desiree Judith Masege; Respondent: Gurwantral Laxman Bhika; Respondent: Albert Ivan Surmany
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 June 2021
Case Number
358/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Saldulker, Makgoka, Mbatha, Gorven, Goosen
Legal Topics
Functus Officio, Appointment of Liquidators, Review of Administrative Action, Locus Standi, Companies Act Section 371, Insolvency Act Section 151
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Functus Officio Appointment of Liquidators Review of Administrative Action Locus Standi Companies Act Section 371 +1 more

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gert Louwrens Steyn De Wet

Appellant

Johan Francois Engelbrecht

Appellant

Sumaiya Abdool Gafaar Khammissa

Respondent

Bethuel Billyboy Mahlatsi

Respondent

Keheditse Desiree Judith Masege

Respondent

Gurwantral Laxman Bhika

Respondent

Albert Ivan Surmany

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Master of the High Court was functus officio after making the first decision not to appoint the appellants as liquidators.
  2. 2 Whether the second decision by the Master to appoint the appellants as liquidators was valid.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents had locus standi to challenge the appointment of liquidators.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Master of the High Court became functus officio upon communicating the first decision not to appoint the appellants as liquidators and issuing the relevant certificate of appointment. There was no statutory provision authorizing the Master to revoke or alter that decision. The requirements for finality were met, and the first decision was irrevocable. Consequently, the second decision to appoint the appellants was invalid and a nullity. The respondents, as parties directly affected by the Master’s decisions, had locus standi at common law to challenge the second decision. The court found that the review application was properly grounded in...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.