Nedcor Bank Ltd and Others v Master of The High Court and Others (1) (111/2001) [2002] ZASCA 53 (29 May 2002)

Nedcor Bank Ltd and Others v Master of The High Court and Others (1) (111/2001) [2002] ZASCA 53 (29 May 2002)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the costs order in paragraph 10 of its original judgment was made per incuriam, meaning it was issued without proper consideration of the relevant legal principles. The Court withdrew the original costs order and substituted it with an order dismissing the appeal with costs, in line with the application of section 152 of the Insolvency Act and established principles governing costs in civil appeals.

Citation
[2002] ZASCA 53
Parties
Appellant: Nedcor Bank Ltd; Appellant: Murray and Roberts Construction Ltd; Appellant: Gary Charles Hess; Appellant: James Byrne; Appellant: Trevor John Griffiths; Respondent: The Master of the High Court, Pretoria; Respondent: Anton Victor Hamman NO; Respondent: Anna Catherina Basson; Respondent: Johannes Marthinus Basson
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 May 2002
Case Number
111/2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Amended Costs Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Hefer, Zulman, Brand, Nugent, Lewis
Legal Topics
Costs Order, Winding Up, Insolvency Act Section 152
Civil Procedure Costs Order Winding Up Insolvency Act Section 152

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nedcor Bank Ltd

Appellant

Murray and Roberts Construction Ltd

Appellant

Gary Charles Hess

Appellant

James Byrne

Appellant

Trevor John Griffiths

Appellant

The Master of the High Court, Pretoria

Respondent

Anton Victor Hamman NO

Respondent

Anna Catherina Basson

Respondent

Johannes Marthinus Basson

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Amended Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the costs order in paragraph 10 of the original judgment was made per incuriam.
  2. 2 What is the appropriate costs order in the appeal regarding the winding-up of a close corporation.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the costs order in paragraph 10 of its original judgment was made per incuriam, meaning it was issued without proper consideration of the relevant legal principles. The Court withdrew the original costs order and substituted it with an order dismissing the appeal with costs, in line with the application of section 152 of the Insolvency Act and established principles governing costs in civil appeals.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.