Denel Soc Ltd v Absa Bank Ltd and Others (19910/2011) [2013] ZAGPJHC 102; [2013] 3 All SA 81 (GSJ) (4 March 2013)

Denel Soc Ltd v Absa Bank Ltd and Others (19910/2011) [2013] ZAGPJHC 102; [2013] 3 All SA 81 (GSJ) (4 March 2013)

The Court held that the demands made by the Second and Third Respondents to the First Respondent under the counter-guarantees were not compliant with the terms of the guarantees. The guarantees were restricted to payment upon the occurrence of specific events, namely, the Applicant's failure to meet performance and warranty obligations. The demands were made for reasons broader than those agreed to, including alleged breaches of anti-corruption clauses, which were not covered by the guarantees. The Court found that the principle of autonomy and independence of demand guarantees and counter-guarantees applies, but payment is only required if the demand strictly complies with the terms of...

Citation
[2013] ZAGPJHC 102
Parties
Applicant: Denel SOC Limited; Respondent: Absa Bank Limited; Respondent: State Bank of India; Respondent: Bank of Baroda; Respondent: Union of India
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 March 2013
Case Number
19910/2011
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Determination of Application for Interdict Pending Arbitration
Outcome
Application granted. The First Respondent is interdicted from making payment under specified counter-guarantees pending finalisation of arbitration and court proceedings in India.
Judges
Malindi AJ
Legal Topics
First Demand Guarantee, Counter Guarantee, Strict Compliance, Fraud Exception, Performance Bond, International Trade Finance

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Denel SOC Limited

Applicant

Absa Bank Limited

Respondent

State Bank of India

Respondent

Bank of Baroda

Respondent

Union of India

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Final Determination of Application for Interdict Pending Arbitration

  1. 1 Whether the demands made under the principal and counter-guarantees were compliant with the terms of the guarantees.
  2. 2 Whether the Applicant is entitled to an interdict restraining payment under the counter-guarantees pending arbitration in India.
  3. 3 Whether the fraud exception applies to the demands made by the Fourth Respondent and, consequently, the Second and Third Respondents.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the demands made by the Second and Third Respondents to the First Respondent under the counter-guarantees were not compliant with the terms of the guarantees. The guarantees were restricted to payment upon the occurrence of specific events, namely, the Applicant's failure to meet performance and warranty obligations. The demands were made for reasons broader than those agreed to, including alleged breaches of anti-corruption clauses, which were not covered by the guarantees. The Court found that the principle of autonomy and independence of demand guarantees and counter-guarantees applies, but payment is only required if the demand strictly complies with the terms of...

Court Disposition

Application granted. The First Respondent is interdicted from making payment under specified counter-guarantees pending finalisation of arbitration and court proceedings in India.

Orders

  • The First Respondent is interdicted from making payment in respect of the listed counter-guarantees pending finalisation of arbitration and court proceedings in India.
  • The First Respondent is interdicted from making payment to the above counterparties pending finalisation of already instituted and pending arbitration proceedings in India in respect of the aforesaid guarantees (excluding counter-guarantee 821-02-0009587-G).