Tait NO and Another v Wescom Business Ventures (Pty) Ltd and Others, Tait NO and Others v Van Niekerk and Others (29833/2016, 2495/2016) [2018] ZAGPPHC 575 (29 June 2018)

Tait NO and Another v Wescom Business Ventures (Pty) Ltd and Others, Tait NO and Others v Van Niekerk and Others (29833/2016, 2495/2016) [2018] ZAGPPHC 575 (29 June 2018)

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The urgent application was not properly served on the respondents, and the applicants did not provide sufficient evidence to rebut the respondents' plausible denial of receipt of notice. The winding-up application was flawed as the respondents were not properly cited, and service on attorneys was insufficient. The deadlock relied upon by the applicants was not substantiated, as the respondents' version was plausible and the reasons for the deadlock were relevant to the exercise of the court's discretion. Consensus on the sale of shares agreement was reached at the meeting, and the...

Citation
[2018] ZAGPPHC 575
Parties
Applicant: Andrew Saul Tait NO; Applicant: Lynette Tait NO; Applicant: Andrew Saul Tait; Applicant: Webcom Business Ventures (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Josef Frederick Van Niekerk NO; Respondent: Maria Magdalena Van Niekerk NO; Respondent: Jacobus Francois Van Heerden NO; Respondent: Josef Frederick Van Niekerk; Respondent: First National Bank
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 June 2018
Case Number
29833/2016, 2495/2016
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment in Main Proceedings
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
A A Crutchfield
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Mareva Injunction, Shareholders Meeting Notice, Winding Up Application, Deadlock in Company, Costs Award
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Leave to Appeal Mareva Injunction Shareholders Meeting Notice Winding Up Application Deadlock in Company Costs Award

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

Andrew Saul Tait NO

Applicant

Lynette Tait NO

Applicant

Andrew Saul Tait

Applicant

Webcom Business Ventures (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Josef Frederick Van Niekerk NO

Respondent

Maria Magdalena Van Niekerk NO

Respondent

Jacobus Francois Van Heerden NO

Respondent

Josef Frederick Van Niekerk

Respondent

First National Bank

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment in Main Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have reasonable prospects of success on appeal regarding the costs of the urgent application.
  2. 2 Whether the urgent application was properly served on the respondents prior to the interim order being granted.
  3. 3 Whether the winding-up application was correctly brought and whether the respondents were properly cited.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The urgent application was not properly served on the respondents, and the applicants did not provide sufficient evidence to rebut the respondents' plausible denial of receipt of notice. The winding-up application was flawed as the respondents were not properly cited, and service on attorneys was insufficient. The deadlock relied upon by the applicants was not substantiated, as the respondents' version was plausible and the reasons for the deadlock were relevant to the exercise of the court's discretion. Consensus on the sale of shares agreement was reached at the meeting, and the...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • The applicants are ordered to pay the costs of the application.