Mark NO and Another v Zelbree Investments (Pty) Ltd and Others In re: Zelbree Investments (Pty) Ltd and Another v Discovery Life Investment Services (07903/11) [2011] ZAGPJHC 13 (15 March 2011)

Mark NO and Another v Zelbree Investments (Pty) Ltd and Others In re: Zelbree Investments (Pty) Ltd and Another v Discovery Life Investment Services (07903/11) [2011] ZAGPJHC 13 (15 March 2011)

The court held that the applicants, as trustees of Emzed Trust – Stephen and 50% shareholders in the respondent companies, have demonstrated a direct and substantial legal interest in the subject matter of the main application. Their concern regarding the potential dissipation of company assets if released to the respondents is legitimate and not frivolous. The court accepted the applicants' version for the purposes of the intervention application, as required by precedent, and found that they have established locus standi to intervene. The application for intervention is therefore granted, with costs reserved for determination by the court hearing the main application.

Citation
[2011] ZAGPJHC 13
Parties
Applicant: Rich Stephen Mark NO; Applicant: Louw Tobias John NO; Respondent: Zelbree Investments (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Outspan Place (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Selma Rich; Respondent: Discovery Life Investment Services (Pty) Ltd
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 March 2011
Case Number
07903/11
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Leave to Intervene in Main Urgent Application
Outcome
Application for leave to intervene granted; costs reserved.
Judges
Mokhari
Legal Topics
Joinder of Parties, Locus Standi, Shareholder Rights, Intervention Application
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Joinder of Parties Locus Standi Shareholder Rights Intervention Application

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rich Stephen Mark NO

Applicant

Louw Tobias John NO

Applicant

Zelbree Investments (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Outspan Place (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Selma Rich

Respondent

Discovery Life Investment Services (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Leave to Intervene in Main Urgent Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have a direct and substantial legal interest in the outcome of the main application.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants, as trustees and shareholders, have locus standi to intervene in the main application.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants' intervention is justified given the risk of dissipation of company assets.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicants, as trustees of Emzed Trust – Stephen and 50% shareholders in the respondent companies, have demonstrated a direct and substantial legal interest in the subject matter of the main application. Their concern regarding the potential dissipation of company assets if released to the respondents is legitimate and not frivolous. The court accepted the applicants' version for the purposes of the intervention application, as required by precedent, and found that they have established locus standi to intervene. The application for intervention is therefore granted, with costs reserved for determination by the court hearing the main application.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to intervene granted; costs reserved.

Orders

  • The first and second applicants are granted leave to intervene in the main application and be joined as second and third respondents respectively.
  • The first, second and third respondents as they appear in the main application shall be the first, second and third applicants.