Pick N Pay Holdings RF; In re: An application in terms of Regulation 7 (3) (a) of the Companies Act for Substituted Service to Deliver Notices to Shareholders by Ordinary Post (CT027MAR2015), Ex parte [2015] ZANCT 29 (19 June 2015)

Pick N Pay Holdings RF; In re: An application in terms of Regulation 7 (3) (a) of the Companies Act for Substituted Service to Deliver Notices to Shareholders by Ordinary Post (CT027MAR2015), Ex parte [2015] ZANCT 29 (19 June 2015)

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence proving impossibility of delivering notices by registered mail to shareholders. The reasons advanced, namely that many shareholders live in disadvantaged communities and that ordinary mail would ensure delivery, were not adequate to establish impossibility as required by Regulation 7 (3) (a). Consequently, the application for substituted service by ordinary post was dismissed.

Citation
[2015] ZANCT 29
Parties
Applicant: Pick N Pay Holdings Limited RF
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 June 2015
Case Number
CT027MAR2015
Procedural Posture
Ex Parte Application / Decision
Outcome
Application dismissed due to insufficient evidence of impossibility to deliver notices by registered mail.
Judges
MMoledi Malokane
Legal Topics
Substituted Service, Delivery of Notices, Shareholder Communications
Commercial and Corporate Substituted Service Delivery of Notices Shareholder Communications

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

Parties

Pick N Pay Holdings Limited RF

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Ex Parte Application / Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has proved impossibility of delivering notices to shareholders by registered mail as required by Regulation 7 (3) (a) of the Companies Act.
  2. 2 Whether substituted service by ordinary post should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence proving impossibility of delivering notices by registered mail to shareholders. The reasons advanced, namely that many shareholders live in disadvantaged communities and that ordinary mail would ensure delivery, were not adequate to establish impossibility as required by Regulation 7 (3) (a). Consequently, the application for substituted service by ordinary post was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed due to insufficient evidence of impossibility to deliver notices by registered mail.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.