Monama N.O v Monama and Sons Electrical Contractors CC and Another (58613/2021) [2024] ZAGPPHC 211 (19 March 2024)

Monama N.O v Monama and Sons Electrical Contractors CC and Another (58613/2021) [2024] ZAGPPHC 211 (19 March 2024)

The court found that the Applicant, as executrix, was excluded from the management and affairs of the close corporation by the Second Respondent, resulting in a deadlock and breakdown of trust. The Second Respondent failed to cooperate with the referee appointed under section 38 of the Superior Courts Act, obstructing the valuation process and frustrating the court-ordered sale of the deceased's member's interest. The explanations provided by the Second Respondent for the lack of documentation and cooperation were found to be contrived and unconvincing. The court held that the animosity and inability of the parties to cooperate rendered the continued operation of the close corporation...

Citation
[2024] ZAGPPHC 211
Parties
Applicant: Lerato Ria Beverly Monama N.O.; Respondent: Monama and Sons Electrical Contractors CC; Respondent: Mpyane Roseberry Monama
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 March 2024
Case Number
58613/2021
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Provisional Winding Up Order; Hearing on Opposed Motion Roll
Outcome
Provisional winding-up order granted; rule nisi issued for final winding-up.
Judges
RJ Groenewald
Legal Topics
Winding Up of Close Corporation, Deadlock Principle, Just and Equitable Ground, Section 38 Referee, Member Rights, Valuation of Members Interest
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Winding Up of Close Corporation Deadlock Principle Just and Equitable Ground Section 38 Referee Member Rights Valuation of Members Interest

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lerato Ria Beverly Monama N.O.

Applicant

Monama and Sons Electrical Contractors CC

Respondent

Mpyane Roseberry Monama

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Provisional Winding Up Order; Hearing on Opposed Motion Roll

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the First Respondent should be placed under provisional winding-up on just and equitable grounds.
  2. 2 Whether a deadlock exists between the members of the close corporation, rendering its continued operation untenable.
  3. 3 Whether the Second Respondent obstructed the referee's valuation process, frustrating the court-ordered sale of the deceased's member's interest.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Applicant, as executrix, was excluded from the management and affairs of the close corporation by the Second Respondent, resulting in a deadlock and breakdown of trust. The Second Respondent failed to cooperate with the referee appointed under section 38 of the Superior Courts Act, obstructing the valuation process and frustrating the court-ordered sale of the deceased's member's interest. The explanations provided by the Second Respondent for the lack of documentation and cooperation were found to be contrived and unconvincing. The court held that the animosity and inability of the parties to cooperate rendered the continued operation of the close corporation...

Court Disposition

Provisional winding-up order granted; rule nisi issued for final winding-up.

Orders

  • The First Respondent is placed under provisional winding-up in the hands of the Master of the High Court, Pretoria.
  • A rule nisi is issued, returnable on 29 July 2024, calling upon interested parties to show cause why a final winding-up order should not be made and why costs should not be costs in the winding-up.