Groffler CC t/a Groffler Capital v Steenkamp and Others (27656/2010) [2010] ZAWCHC 362 (16 February 2010)

Groffler CC t/a Groffler Capital v Steenkamp and Others (27656/2010) [2010] ZAWCHC 362 (16 February 2010)

The court found that ABSA Bank Limited (Pty) had locus standi and that its deponent was duly authorised to represent it in the intervention application. The applicant established a prima facie case for provisional sequestration, including a liquidated claim and evidence of insolvency. The court accepted Langeveld's...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2010] ZAWCHC 362
Parties
Applicant: Groffler CC t/a Groffler Capital; Respondent: Wilhelm Steenkamp; Respondent: Jeanette Steenkamp; Respondent: ABSA Bank Limited (Pty)
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
16 February 2010
Case Number
27656/2010
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Provisional Sequestration and Intervention by Secured Creditor
Outcome
ABSA Bank Limited (Pty) is granted leave to intervene. The first respondent, Wilhelm Jacobus Steenkamp, is placed under provisional sequestration in terms of the rule nisi.
Judges
Baartman
Legal Topics
Provisional Sequestration, Secured Creditor Intervention, Valuation of Immovable Property, Advantage to Creditors, Authority to Represent Company, Forced Sale Value
Civil Procedure Banking and Finance Land and Property Provisional Sequestration Secured Creditor Intervention Valuation of Immovable Property Advantage to Creditors Authority to Represent Company +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Groffler CC t/a Groffler Capital

Applicant

Wilhelm Steenkamp

Respondent

Jeanette Steenkamp

Respondent

ABSA Bank Limited (Pty)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Provisional Sequestration and Intervention by Secured Creditor

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether ABSA Bank Limited (Pty) should be granted leave to intervene as a secured creditor in the sequestration proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has established reason to believe that provisional sequestration of the first respondent's estate would be to the advantage of creditors.
  3. 3 What is the appropriate forced sale value of the immovable property for purposes of assessing advantage to creditors.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that ABSA Bank Limited (Pty) had locus standi and that its deponent was duly authorised to represent it in the intervention application. The applicant established a prima facie case for provisional sequestration, including a liquidated claim and evidence of insolvency. The court accepted Langeveld's valuation of the immovable property, finding the Auction Alliance valuation unnecessarily pessimistic given the property's features and market context. The court was satisfied that there was reason to believe that sequestration would be to the advantage of the general body of creditors, even if the benefit to concurrent creditors was limited. The applicant's allegation of...

Court Disposition

ABSA Bank Limited (Pty) is granted leave to intervene. The first respondent, Wilhelm Jacobus Steenkamp, is placed under provisional sequestration in terms of the rule nisi.

Orders

  • ABSA Bank Limited (Pty), the Intervening Creditor, is given leave to intervene in these proceedings.
  • The first respondent, Wilhelm Jacobus Steenkamp, is placed under provisional sequestration in terms of the rule nisi issued in the order annexed hereto marked 'X'.