Federation Internationale de Football Association v Sedibe & Another (303/2020) [2021] ZASCA 113; [2021] 4 All SA 321 (SCA); 2021 BIP 11 (SCA); [2021] HIPR 180 (SCA) (8 September 2021)
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
303/2020
Judges
Navsa, Mbha, Mocumie, Gorven, Mabindla-Boqwana
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the attachment of FIFA's trademarks in South Africa to found jurisdiction for Sedibe's intended review of a decision taken by FIFA's Ethics Committee in Switzerland was impermissible. The attachment order was not justified because the claim was not one sounding in money nor an action in rem for movables. The review application sought to set aside an administrative decision, not to recover a monetary claim or movable property. The court found that the high court's speculation about possible future monetary claims was unfounded and irrelevant to the basis f…
Obiang v Van Rensburg and Another (A338/2018) [2019] ZAWCHC 105; [2019] 4 All SA 287 (WCC) (20 August 2019)
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
A338/2018
Judges
R. Allie, P.A.L. Gamble, N.P. Boqwana
The court held that the order confirming attachment to found jurisdiction is final in effect and thus appealable. There was no material non-disclosure by Mr. van Rensburg in the ex parte application that would warrant setting aside the attachment order. On the evidence, Mr. van Rensburg established a prima facie case in delict against Mr. Obiang personally, based on allegations that Mr. Obiang, acting in his personal capacity and through his control of the Rapid Intervention Force, ordered and maintained Mr. van Rensburg's wrongful detention to advance private interests. The act of state doct…
Ex parte: Balkan Energy Limited and Another; In re: Balkan Energy Limited and Another v Government of the Republic of Ghana (17/18638) [2017] ZAGPJHC 197; 2017 (5) SA 428 (GJ) (29 June 2017)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
17/18638
Judge
S Kuny
The court held that it has jurisdiction to recognise and enforce the foreign arbitral award under section 2 of the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards Act 40 of 1977, provided that property of the respondent is attached within the jurisdiction. The attachment of shares in AngloGold Ashanti Limited, held by the Government of Ghana, is sufficient to found jurisdiction. The Power Purchase Agreement does not fall within the scope of the Protection of Businesses Act, as it concerns the supply of electricity and not raw materials. Clause 24 of the PPA constitutes a waiver of immu…
Source excerpt
Recognition And Enforcement Of Foreign Arbitral Awards
Quits Aviation Services Limited v Empire Engineering (Pty) Ltd and Others (21298/2016) [2016] ZAGPJHC 218 (17 August 2016)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
21298/2016
Judge
Van der Linde
The court held that the order of Mokgoathleng, J was not suspended by the respondents' notice of application for leave to appeal, as the order was, in substance, a negative order not capable of being put into operation or execution. The respondents' reliance on section 18(1) of the Superior Courts Act was misplaced, and the technicality regarding the name of the recipient company did not excuse non-compliance, as the intention of the order was clear. However, the court found that the respondents may not have known the correct legal position regarding suspension, given the recent repeal of rul…
United Medical Devices LLC and Another v Blue Rock Capital Limited and Another (13398/2015) [2016] ZAKZDHC 12 (4 March 2016)
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Case number
13398/2015
Judge
Marks AJ
The High Court set aside an ex parte order attaching contractual trademark rights to found jurisdiction, citing material non-disclosure and the nature of the relief sought.
Multi-links Telecommunications Ltd v Africa Prepaid Services Nigeria Ltd (35347/13, 30004/13) [2013] ZAGPPHC 261; [2013] 4 All SA 346 (GNP); 2014 (3) SA 265 (GP) (6 September 2013)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
35347/13; 30004/13
Judge
Fabricius
The court held that, although APSN is a foreign peregrinus, the North Gauteng High Court may exercise jurisdiction based on sufficient connecting factors, appropriateness, and convenience, as developed in Strang and subsequent case law. The arbitration agreement specified South African law and venue, APSN's principal agent was domiciled in the jurisdiction, and most relevant events and parties were connected to South Africa. The court found that Multi-Links and Telkom had raised a triable issue regarding jurisdiction and that the question should be finally determined by the trial court, not a…
ACL Group (Edms) Bpk and Others v Qick Televentures FZE (2013 (1) SA 508 (FB)) [2012] ZAFSHC 249; [2012] ZAFSHC 145 (12 July 2012)
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
82/2012
Judge
Snellenburg
The court held that a foreign company registered as an external company and conducting business in South Africa is not resident for purposes of section 28(1) of the Supreme Court Act. The mere fact of registration and business activity does not confer residence. The applicants satisfied all requirements for attachment to confirm jurisdiction: they established a prima facie cause of action for payment under various agreements, the respondent is a peregrinus, the property sought to be attached is beneficially owned by the respondent and situated within the Republic, and a material element of th…
Harris and Others v Rees and Others (09/32226) [2010] ZAGPJHC 51; [2010] 4 All SA 603 (GSJ) ; 2011 (2) SA 294 (GSJ) (25 June 2010)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
09/32226
Judge
J.P. Horn
The court held that the applicants, as trustees, had locus standi to bring the application despite the absence of letters of authority from the Master at the time of launching proceedings. The court found that the first respondent had deliberately placed himself outside the jurisdiction, was intimately involved in a fraudulent investment scheme, and had used the trusts and companies as alter egos to conceal and launder investor funds. The attachment order was confirmed as the applicants established a prima facie case for relief, and the court exercised its discretion to allow the filing of a…
