Masizenzele Primary Co-operative Ltd and Others v King Sabata Dalindyebo Secondary Co-operative Ltd and Others (1178/2009) [2011] ZAECMHC 20 (10 November 2011)

Masizenzele Primary Co-operative Ltd and Others v King Sabata Dalindyebo Secondary Co-operative Ltd and Others (1178/2009) [2011] ZAECMHC 20 (10 November 2011)

The court found that the applicants had locus standi as members and sub-contractors of the first respondent, but their claims for relief had been overtaken by events, specifically the appointment of a new board of directors in July 2008. The applicants failed to provide sufficient evidence to dispute the validity of the meeting at which the new board was appointed, and their denial was conditional and unsupported by documentation. Applying the principles governing disputes of fact in motion proceedings, the court held that no genuine dispute of fact existed and that the applicants had not made out a case for confirmation of the rule nisi or final relief. The application was dismissed with...

Citation
[2011] ZAECMHC 20
Parties
Applicant: Masizenzele Primary Co-operative Ltd; Applicant: Uncedo Primary Co-operative Ltd; Applicant: Laphumikhwezi Primary Co-operative Ltd; Applicant: Nceduluntu Primary Co-operative Ltd; Applicant: Ithemba Primary Co-operative Ltd; Applicant: Siyabulela Primary Co-operative Ltd; Applicant: Ukukhanya Primary Co-operative Ltd; Applicant: Kuyalunga Primary Co-operative Ltd; Applicant: Zolile Primary Co-operative Ltd; Applicant: Xolani Primary Co-operative Ltd; Applicant: Mkate Trading Enterprise CC; Applicant: Iris Nonkosinathi Mbodlela; Applicant: Bennett Pumelele Banzana; Applicant: Qangule Sikholiwe; Applicant: Nothemba Theodora September; Applicant: Andile Manyifolo; Applicant: Mbana Livi; Applicant: Nokweli Thulani; Respondent: King Sabata Dalindyebo Local Secondary Co-operative Ltd; Respondent: Cross Bar Border Agencies t/a Amandla Foods Commodity Suppliers; Respondent: Member of the Executive Council for the Department of Education, Eastern Cape
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 November 2011
Case Number
1178/2009
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Return Date of Rule Nisi; Confirmation or Discharge of Interim Order
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
N G Beshe
Legal Topics
Locus Standi, School Nutrition Programme, Board of Directors Dispute, Interim Relief, Rule Nisi, Corporate Governance
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Locus Standi School Nutrition Programme Board of Directors Dispute Interim Relief Rule Nisi Corporate Governance

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Masizenzele Primary Co-operative Ltd

Applicant

Uncedo Primary Co-operative Ltd

Applicant

Laphumikhwezi Primary Co-operative Ltd

Applicant

Nceduluntu Primary Co-operative Ltd

Applicant

Ithemba Primary Co-operative Ltd

Applicant

Siyabulela Primary Co-operative Ltd

Applicant

Ukukhanya Primary Co-operative Ltd

Applicant

Kuyalunga Primary Co-operative Ltd

Applicant

Zolile Primary Co-operative Ltd

Applicant

Xolani Primary Co-operative Ltd

Applicant

Mkate Trading Enterprise CC

Applicant

Iris Nonkosinathi Mbodlela

Applicant

Bennett Pumelele Banzana

Applicant

Qangule Sikholiwe

Applicant

Nothemba Theodora September

Applicant

Andile Manyifolo

Applicant

Mbana Livi

Applicant

Nokweli Thulani

Applicant

King Sabata Dalindyebo Local Secondary Co-operative Ltd

Respondent

Cross Bar Border Agencies t/a Amandla Foods Commodity Suppliers

Respondent

Member of the Executive Council for the Department of Education, Eastern Cape

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Return Date of Rule Nisi; Confirmation or Discharge of Interim Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have locus standi to seek relief against the first respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the procedure for appointing a new board of directors of the first respondent was properly followed.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants have made out a case for confirmation of the rule nisi and final relief.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had locus standi as members and sub-contractors of the first respondent, but their claims for relief had been overtaken by events, specifically the appointment of a new board of directors in July 2008. The applicants failed to provide sufficient evidence to dispute the validity of the meeting at which the new board was appointed, and their denial was conditional and unsupported by documentation. Applying the principles governing disputes of fact in motion proceedings, the court held that no genuine dispute of fact existed and that the applicants had not made out a case for confirmation of the rule nisi or final relief. The application was dismissed with...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.