Yaram Trading CC v ABSA Bank [2005] ZAGPHC 377; 65/05/01 (19 September 2005)

Yaram Trading CC v ABSA Bank [2005] ZAGPHC 377; 65/05/01 (19 September 2005)

The court found that, while the manager has certain powers and duties under the Collective Investments Schemes Control Act, there is nothing in the Act that precludes the trustee from bringing an application for eviction. The architecture of the Act distinguishes between the entrepreneurial and investment functions of the manager and the administrative functions of the trustee. The trustee is not prohibited from instituting proceedings, and in fact, is ordinarily the proper party to do so in matters concerning the administration of the property. The point in limine raised by the respondent regarding locus standi was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2005] ZAGPHC 377
Parties
Plaintiff: Yaram Trading CC; Respondent: ABSA Bank
Court
High Courts - Gauteng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 September 2005
Case Number
7865/05
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Point in Limine
Outcome
The point in limine regarding locus standi is dismissed.
Judges
Willis
Legal Topics
Locus Standi, Collective Investment Schemes, Eviction Application
Civil Procedure Locus Standi Collective Investment Schemes Eviction Application

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

Yaram Trading CC

Plaintiff

ABSA Bank

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Point in Limine

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant trustee has locus standi to bring the eviction application.
  2. 2 Whether the manager, rather than the trustee, is the proper party to institute proceedings under the Collective Investments Schemes Control Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, while the manager has certain powers and duties under the Collective Investments Schemes Control Act, there is nothing in the Act that precludes the trustee from bringing an application for eviction. The architecture of the Act distinguishes between the entrepreneurial and investment functions of the manager and the administrative functions of the trustee. The trustee is not prohibited from instituting proceedings, and in fact, is ordinarily the proper party to do so in matters concerning the administration of the property. The point in limine raised by the respondent regarding locus standi was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

The point in limine regarding locus standi is dismissed.

Orders

  • The applicant trustee is found to have locus standi to bring the eviction application.
  • The matter may proceed on its merits.