Jili v NBC Holdings (Pty) Ltd (63168/2012) [2017] ZAGPPHC 158 (3 April 2017)

Jili v NBC Holdings (Pty) Ltd (63168/2012) [2017] ZAGPPHC 158 (3 April 2017)

The applicants failed to establish any factual basis for the existence of the alleged R21 billion offshore investment. The financial statements provided by the respondents demonstrated that the asset values of the relevant funds were never close to the claimed amount. The application was procedurally defective, with unsigned affidavits and lack of authority for the first applicant to represent unidentified parties. The allegations against the respondents were gratuitous, vague, and unsupported by evidence. The applicants' attorneys were warned about the lack of merit but persisted with the litigation, warranting a punitive costs order. The application was dismissed, and the applicants'...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 158
Parties
Applicant: Dlezakhe Jili (Chairperson); Respondent: NBC Holdings (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: ISCOR Employees Retirement Fund; Respondent: ISCOR Pension Fund Trustees; Respondent: ISCOR Employees Retirement Fund, Newcastle; Respondent: South African Receiver of Revenue (SARS); Respondent: ABSA Bank Limited (Johannesburg); Respondent: The Minister of Department of Labour; Respondent: The Master of the North Gauteng High Court; Respondent: Department of Home Affairs; Respondent: RFS Administrators (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: ISCOR Retirement Fund Board; Respondent: Bambanani Benefits Administrators
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 April 2017
Case Number
63168/2012
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Access to Information and Records Regarding Alleged Offshore Investment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs de bonis propriis against the applicants' attorneys.
Judges
S. A. M. Baqwa
Legal Topics
Access to Information, Pension Funds Act Compliance, Offshore Investment Records, Scandalous and Vexatious Allegations
Civil Procedure Banking and Finance Access to Information Pension Funds Act Compliance Offshore Investment Records Scandalous and Vexatious Allegations

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 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dlezakhe Jili (Chairperson)

Applicant

NBC Holdings (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

ISCOR Employees Retirement Fund

Respondent

ISCOR Pension Fund Trustees

Respondent

ISCOR Employees Retirement Fund, Newcastle

Respondent

South African Receiver of Revenue (SARS)

Respondent

ABSA Bank Limited (Johannesburg)

Respondent

The Minister of Department of Labour

Respondent

The Master of the North Gauteng High Court

Respondent

Department of Home Affairs

Respondent

RFS Administrators (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

ISCOR Retirement Fund Board

Respondent

Bambanani Benefits Administrators

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Access to Information and Records Regarding Alleged Offshore Investment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to an order compelling the respondents to provide information regarding an alleged R21 billion offshore investment.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have established a factual basis for the existence of the alleged investment.
  3. 3 Whether the application is defective due to procedural irregularities and lack of proper affidavits.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants failed to establish any factual basis for the existence of the alleged R21 billion offshore investment. The financial statements provided by the respondents demonstrated that the asset values of the relevant funds were never close to the claimed amount. The application was procedurally defective, with unsigned affidavits and lack of authority for the first applicant to represent unidentified parties. The allegations against the respondents were gratuitous, vague, and unsupported by evidence. The applicants' attorneys were warned about the lack of merit but persisted with the litigation, warranting a punitive costs order. The application was dismissed, and the applicants'...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs de bonis propriis against the applicants' attorneys.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • Ntimane Attorneys, the applicants' attorneys, are ordered to pay the respondents' costs de bonis propriis, including costs of two counsel.