Annex Distribution (Pty) Ltd and Others v Bank of Baroda (52590/2017) [2017] ZAGPPHC 639 (9 October 2017)

Parties

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Interim Interdict Pending Final Relief

Legal Issues

1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to an interim interdict preventing the bank from closing their accounts pending final relief.
2. 2 Whether the bank's termination notices constitute reasonable notice under the circumstances.
3. 3 Whether the bank's conduct in terminating the relationship is contrary to public policy.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had established a prima facie right to reasonable notice before termination of their banking relationships, and that the bank's notices may not have afforded sufficient time under the circumstances. The applicants demonstrated that closure of their accounts would cause irreparable harm to their businesses and employees, while the bank's claim of reputational harm was speculative and unsupported by concrete evidence. The balance of convenience favoured the applicants, given the potential impact on thousands of workers and the absence of alternative remedies. The court rejected the bank's arguments on urgency, abuse of process, and res judicata, finding...

Court Disposition

Interim interdict granted restraining the bank from closing applicants' accounts pending final relief; costs awarded to applicants except for striking out application.

Orders

• Pending final determination of the application for final relief, the respondent is interdicted from de-activating or closing the applicants' banking accounts or terminating the banker-customer relationship for the reasons stated in the termination notices dated 6 July 2017.
• The respondent is interdicted from demanding repayment of sums owed by the first to fourth applicants under loan and overdraft agreements for the reasons stated in the termination notices dated 6 July 2017.