Pienaar and Another v Raadt and Others (2277/2024) [2025] ZANCHC 64 (25 July 2025)

Pienaar and Another v Raadt and Others (2277/2024) [2025] ZANCHC 64 (25 July 2025)

The applicants failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the respondents did not comply with the court order of 11 April 2025. The respondents demonstrated that Scarlet Sun 15 (Pty) Ltd was dormant during the relevant period and that no documents existed to provide. Furthermore, the respondents' application for leave to appeal suspended the operation of the order under section 18(1) of the Superior Courts Act. The applicants did not provide sufficient explanation for the delay in bringing the application or for the urgency claimed. The presumption of wilfulness and mala fides was rebutted by the respondents' evidence. Accordingly, the requirements for contempt of court were not...

Citation
[2025] ZANCHC 64
Parties
Applicant: Innocentia Miracles Pienaar; Applicant: Motlalepula Segami; Respondent: Jerome Phenyo Raadt; Respondent: Derick Corns; Respondent: Scarlet Sun 15 (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Blue Dust 7 (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: The Commissioner of Companies and Intellectual Property Commission
Court
Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 July 2025
Case Number
2277/2024
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interlocutory Application for Contempt of Court
Outcome
Application dismissed. Respondents not found in contempt of court.
Judges
Mamosebo
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Urgent Interlocutory Relief, Director Rights, Companies Act 71 of 2008, Suspension of Order on Appeal
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Contempt of Court Urgent Interlocutory Relief Director Rights Companies Act 71 of 2008 Suspension of Order on Appeal

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Innocentia Miracles Pienaar

Applicant

Motlalepula Segami

Applicant

Jerome Phenyo Raadt

Respondent

Derick Corns

Respondent

Scarlet Sun 15 (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Blue Dust 7 (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

The Commissioner of Companies and Intellectual Property Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Interlocutory Application for Contempt of Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application should be heard as urgent under Rule 6(12)(a) of the Uniform Rules of Court.
  2. 2 Whether the first to fourth respondents are in contempt of the court order granted on 11 April 2025.
  3. 3 Whether the requirements for contempt of court have been met beyond reasonable doubt.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the respondents did not comply with the court order of 11 April 2025. The respondents demonstrated that Scarlet Sun 15 (Pty) Ltd was dormant during the relevant period and that no documents existed to provide. Furthermore, the respondents' application for leave to appeal suspended the operation of the order under section 18(1) of the Superior Courts Act. The applicants did not provide sufficient explanation for the delay in bringing the application or for the urgency claimed. The presumption of wilfulness and mala fides was rebutted by the respondents' evidence. Accordingly, the requirements for contempt of court were not...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed. Respondents not found in contempt of court.

Orders

  • The respondents are not in contempt of this court’s order of 11 April 2025.
  • The application is dismissed.