Morudi and Others v NC Housing Services and Development Co Ltd and Others (903/2016) [2017] ZASCA 121 (22 September 2017)

Morudi and Others v NC Housing Services and Development Co Ltd and Others (903/2016) [2017] ZASCA 121 (22 September 2017)

The majority held that the requirements for rescission were not met. The appellants failed to establish a bona fide defence with prospects of success, as the urgent application to set aside the 19 April 2013 resolution was dismissed and not appealed, leaving the resolution intact. The withdrawal of opposition by the company bound the appellants, who were cited in their representative capacities, and their attempt to challenge the withdrawal had failed. The court found no procedural irregularity or infringement of rights under section 34 of the Constitution. The appeal was dismissed with costs. The dissenting judgment argued that the appellants had locus standi both as shareholders and...

Citation
[2017] ZASCA 121
Parties
Appellant: Mosalasuping Phillip Morudi; Appellant: Further 70 Appellants; Respondent: NC Housing Services & Development Co Ltd; Respondent: Scholtz Jacobs Babuseng; Respondent: Seodi Julius Mongwaketsi
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 September 2017
Case Number
903/2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal of Rescission Application
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Cachalia, Tshiqi, Mathopo, Molemela, Mbatha
Legal Topics
Rescission of Judgment, Locus Standi, Shareholder Rights, Directors Liability, Company Memorandum, Rule 42 Uniform Rules
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Rescission of Judgment Locus Standi Shareholder Rights Directors Liability Company Memorandum Rule 42 Uniform Rules

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mosalasuping Phillip Morudi

Appellant

Further 70 Appellants

Appellant

NC Housing Services & Development Co Ltd

Respondent

Scholtz Jacobs Babuseng

Respondent

Seodi Julius Mongwaketsi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal of Rescission Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants established sufficient grounds for rescission of the judgment under common law or rule 42(1)(a).
  2. 2 Whether the appellants had locus standi to bring the rescission application in their personal or representative capacities.
  3. 3 Whether the appellants provided a reasonable and acceptable explanation for their default.

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that the requirements for rescission were not met. The appellants failed to establish a bona fide defence with prospects of success, as the urgent application to set aside the 19 April 2013 resolution was dismissed and not appealed, leaving the resolution intact. The withdrawal of opposition by the company bound the appellants, who were cited in their representative capacities, and their attempt to challenge the withdrawal had failed. The court found no procedural irregularity or infringement of rights under section 34 of the Constitution. The appeal was dismissed with costs. The dissenting judgment argued that the appellants had locus standi both as shareholders and...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, which shall include those of two counsel.