Tristar Investments (Pty) Ltd v The Chemical Industries National Provident Fund (455/12) [2013] ZASCA 59 (16 May 2013)

Tristar Investments (Pty) Ltd v The Chemical Industries National Provident Fund (455/12) [2013] ZASCA 59 (16 May 2013)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the services provided by Tristar Investments to the Fund did not constitute 'intermediary services' as defined by the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act. The court found that Tristar's role was limited to furnishing advice and monitoring asset managers, without directly managing or administering financial products or acting as a go-between between the Fund and product suppliers. The Act only prohibits unlicensed provision of intermediary services, not other services outside its scope. Therefore, the agreement between the parties was not unlawful, and the trial court erred in declaring it void.

Citation
[2013] ZASCA 59
Parties
Appellant: Tristar Investments (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: The Chemical Industries National Provident Fund
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
16 May 2013
Case Number
455/12
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From First Instance Judgment
Outcome
Appeal upheld; trial court's orders set aside and substituted.
Judges
Nugent, Lewis, Tshiqi, Petse, Swain
Legal Topics
Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, Licensing Requirements, Contract Validity, Unlawful Agreement
Commercial and Corporate Banking and Finance Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act Licensing Requirements Contract Validity Unlawful Agreement

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tristar Investments (Pty) Ltd

Appellant

The Chemical Industries National Provident Fund

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From First Instance Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the agreement between Tristar Investments and the Chemical Industries National Provident Fund was unlawful under the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act.
  2. 2 Whether Tristar Investments rendered 'intermediary services' without the required licence.
  3. 3 Whether the services provided by Tristar fell within the definition of 'intermediary service' under the Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the services provided by Tristar Investments to the Fund did not constitute 'intermediary services' as defined by the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act. The court found that Tristar's role was limited to furnishing advice and monitoring asset managers, without directly managing or administering financial products or acting as a go-between between the Fund and product suppliers. The Act only prohibits unlicensed provision of intermediary services, not other services outside its scope. Therefore, the agreement between the parties was not unlawful, and the trial court erred in declaring it void.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; trial court's orders set aside and substituted.

Orders

  • It is declared that the agreement between the parties is not unlawful.
  • The plaintiff is to pay the costs associated with disposal of the issue referred to above.