Louw v W P (Kooperatief) Bpk. and Others (92/93) [1994] ZASCA 54; 1994 (3) SA 434 (AD); [1994] 2 All SA 366 (A) (30 March 1994)

Louw v W P (Kooperatief) Bpk. and Others (92/93) [1994] ZASCA 54; 1994 (3) SA 434 (AD); [1994] 2 All SA 366 (A) (30 March 1994)

The court held that the session agreement between the Koöperasie and the Land Bank was conditional, only transferring the right to enforce claims upon the occurrence of specified events under section 63(1) of the Land Bank Act. As none of these events had occurred, the Koöperasie retained locus standi to apply for sequestration of the appellant. The mutual intention of the parties, as evidenced by affidavits, confirmed that the session was not immediately operative. The appellant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal, and his explanation for non-compliance with appellate rules was insufficient to justify condonation. The application for condonation was dismissed,...

Citation
[1994] ZASCA 54
Parties
Appellant: Coenraad Johannes Henoch Louw; Respondent: W P (Koöperatief) Beperk; Respondent: B Wallace N.O.; Respondent: Meester van die Hooggeregshof Kaap die Goeie Hoop; Respondent: M E van der Riet; Respondent: Land- en Landbou Bank van Suid-Afrika
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 March 1994
Case Number
92/93
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal of Condonation and Locus Standi Determination
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; condonation application refused; costs awarded against appellant and his attorney.
Judges
Joubert, Hefer, Smalberger, F H Grosskopf, Howie
Legal Topics
Condonation, Locus Standi, Session of Claims, Securitatem Debiti, Statutory Interpretation

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

Parties

Coenraad Johannes Henoch Louw

Appellant

W P (Koöperatief) Beperk

Respondent

B Wallace N.O.

Respondent

Meester van die Hooggeregshof Kaap die Goeie Hoop

Respondent

M E van der Riet

Respondent

Land- en Landbou Bank van Suid-Afrika

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal of Condonation and Locus Standi Determination

  1. 1 Whether the appellant is entitled to condonation for late filing of the appeal record and failure to provide security for costs.
  2. 2 Whether the session agreement deprived the first respondent of locus standi to apply for sequestration of the appellant.
  3. 3 Whether the session agreement constituted a conditional cession under the Land Bank Act, and if so, whether the condition had been fulfilled.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the session agreement between the Koöperasie and the Land Bank was conditional, only transferring the right to enforce claims upon the occurrence of specified events under section 63(1) of the Land Bank Act. As none of these events had occurred, the Koöperasie retained locus standi to apply for sequestration of the appellant. The mutual intention of the parties, as evidenced by affidavits, confirmed that the session was not immediately operative. The appellant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal, and his explanation for non-compliance with appellate rules was insufficient to justify condonation. The application for condonation was dismissed,...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; condonation application refused; costs awarded against appellant and his attorney.

Orders

  • The applications for condonation for late filing of the appeal record and exemption from providing security are dismissed with costs.
  • The appellant's Cape Town attorney of record is ordered to pay two-thirds of the costs related to the condonation applications de bonis propriis, excluding costs of appearance in this court on 14 March 1994.