T One C Trading and Projects (Pty) Ltd v Cape Finance Corporation (Pty) Ltd (1615/25) [2025] ZAMPMHC 22 (7 April 2025)

T One C Trading and Projects (Pty) Ltd v Cape Finance Corporation (Pty) Ltd (1615/25) [2025] ZAMPMHC 22 (7 April 2025)

The application was struck off because the applicant failed to prove authority to institute proceedings on behalf of the company. The board resolution relied upon was found inadmissible due to discrepancies between the resolution and the CIPC records regarding the number of directors. The applicant did not adequately address the respondent's point in limine, and the evidence presented by the respondent was accepted. The court found that the applicant had no authority to litigate, rendering the application incompetent.

Citation
[2025] ZAMPMHC 22
Parties
Applicant: T One C Trading and Projects (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Cape Finance Corporation (Pty) Ltd
Court
Middelburg High Court, Mpumalanga
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 April 2025
Case Number
1615/25
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application Struck Off for Lack of Authority
Outcome
Application struck off for lack of authority; no order as to costs.
Judges
Leso
Legal Topics
Locus Standi, Board Resolution Requirement, Company Registration Status
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Locus Standi Board Resolution Requirement Company Registration Status

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

T One C Trading and Projects (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Cape Finance Corporation (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application Struck Off for Lack of Authority

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant had authority to institute proceedings on behalf of the company.
  2. 2 Whether the urgency of the application was justified.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant had locus standi given its registration status.

Ratio Decidendi

The application was struck off because the applicant failed to prove authority to institute proceedings on behalf of the company. The board resolution relied upon was found inadmissible due to discrepancies between the resolution and the CIPC records regarding the number of directors. The applicant did not adequately address the respondent's point in limine, and the evidence presented by the respondent was accepted. The court found that the applicant had no authority to litigate, rendering the application incompetent.

Court Disposition

Application struck off for lack of authority; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The application is struck off.
  • No order as to costs.