Systems Applications Consultants (Pty) Ltd t/a Securinfo v Systems Applications Products AG and Others (1371/2018) [2020] ZASCA 81 (2 July 2020)

Systems Applications Consultants (Pty) Ltd t/a Securinfo v Systems Applications Products AG and Others (1371/2018) [2020] ZASCA 81 (2 July 2020)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant failed to demonstrate any material change in circumstances warranting the release of the R4 million security for costs ordered in 2012. The repeal of the Companies Act 61 of 1973 and the coming into operation of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 did not affect the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] ZASCA 81
Parties
Appellant: Systems Applications Consultants (Pty) Ltd t/a Securinfo; Respondent: Systems Applications Products AG; Respondent: Ungani Investments (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Vhonani Mufamadi
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 July 2020
Case Number
1371/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Interlocutory Order for Release of Security for Costs
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs occasioned by employment of two counsel.
Judges
Wallis, Molemela, Mokgohloa, Koen, Mabindla-Boqwana
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Companies Act 1973, Inherent Jurisdiction, Abuse of Process, Joinder of Parties
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Security for Costs Companies Act 1973 Inherent Jurisdiction Abuse of Process Joinder of Parties

Source-derived case record

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Systems Applications Consultants (Pty) Ltd t/a Securinfo

Appellant

Systems Applications Products AG

Respondent

Ungani Investments (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Vhonani Mufamadi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Interlocutory Order for Release of Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court a quo had the power to reconsider and release the security for costs ordered in 2012.
  2. 2 Whether there was a material change in circumstances justifying the release of the security.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent abused the court process to stifle the main action.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant failed to demonstrate any material change in circumstances warranting the release of the R4 million security for costs ordered in 2012. The repeal of the Companies Act 61 of 1973 and the coming into operation of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 did not affect the validity or enforceability of the 2012 Order, as transitional provisions and the Interpretation Act preserved the applicability of the repealed Act to proceedings instituted before its repeal. The joinder of Ungani Investments (Pty) Ltd did not constitute a material change, as the appellant failed to provide objective evidence of Ungani's financial standing sufficient to satisfy an...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs occasioned by employment of two counsel.

Orders

  • The respondent’s application for the admission of new evidence on appeal is dismissed with costs, including the costs occasioned by the employment of two counsel.
  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, including the costs occasioned by the employment of two counsel.