Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Solidarity obo Keyter and Others v Domans NO and Others (JS553/24) [2025] ZALCJHB 221 (13 June 2025)
The Labour Court held that section 133 of the Companies Act is not a jurisdictional bar, but it suspends unfair dismissal proceedings while business rescue continues.
Select M Stores (Pty) Ltd v ADIDAS South Africa (Pty) Ltd (2545/2022) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1294 (19 December 2024)
The High Court dismissed an application to rescind default judgment, finding no bona fide defence or proper basis to invoke business rescue protections.
Van Jaarsveld N.O and Others v Barzani 53 (Pty) Ltd and Others (051185/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1126 (5 November 2024)
The court found that the first respondent failed to provide any factual or legal basis for its opposition to the cancellation of the caveat. No affidavit from the person with personal knowledge was submitted, and the only opposition was a technical reliance on the business rescue moratorium, which was not substantiated by facts or a valid legal claim to the property. The caveat was registered under Regulation 68 of the Deeds Registries Act, which does not apply in circumstances where the deed is not lost. The opposition was found to be disingenuous and intended to frustrate the transfer proce…
Source excerpt
Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd v Vally and Another (2023-077576) [2024] ZAGPPHC 978 (26 September 2024)
The court enforced a principal guarantee against one guarantor despite the company’s business rescue, but postponed the case against the sequestrated first respondent.
Karsten and Another v Road Accident Fund and Others (1962/2012) [2024] ZANCHC 29 (22 March 2024)
The court dismissed the RAF’s prescription plea, finding the claim was lodged by registered post on time. Proceedings against the Post Office were suspended due to business rescue.
Khewija Engineering and Construction (Pty) Ltd v Van Den Steen NO and Another (12760/2021) [2023] ZAGPJHC 760 (4 July 2023)
The court found that Khewija failed to establish a prima facie case for a genuine counterclaim with reasonable prospects of success. The applicant's indebtedness to Group Five was confirmed by written undertakings and correspondence, and the counterclaim was only raised after repeated defaults and rejection of settlement proposals. Khewija did not comply with the contractual requirements for notifying defects and referring disputes for adjudication prior to arbitration. The application to uplift the statutory moratorium and stay the liquidation was not bona fide and would undermine the purpos…
Source excerpt
Tayob N.O and Others v City of Matlosana Local Municipality (1483/20) [2023] ZANWHC 95 (21 June 2023)
The High Court stayed the main proceedings and ordered that the section 133 business rescue moratorium question be determined first in a separate application.
ARB Electrical Wholesalers (Pty) Ltd v De Jager Electrical Maintenance CC and Another (2022/20849) [2023] ZAGPJHC 701 (14 June 2023)
Summary judgment was granted against a surety for a company debt, with the court holding that business rescue did not protect the surety and technical Rule 32 defects were condoned.
Carospan (Pty) Limited t/a Nashua Bloemfontein v Jager (Pty) Limited and Another (5144/2022) [2023] ZAFSHC 230 (5 June 2023)
The court found that the allegations in paragraphs 6.7 and 6.7.1 of the opposing affidavit were irrelevant, scandalous, and vexatious, as they did not relate to the respondents' liability and contradicted their own defence. The business rescue moratorium under section 133 of the Companies Act does not apply to claims for the return of goods following cancellation of a rental agreement, nor does it protect the second respondent. The claim of non-joinder of Van Straaten was dismissed, as he did not sign the deed of suretyship and has no direct and substantial interest in the proceedings. The re…
Source excerpt
National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) obo Members and Others v South African Airways (SOC) Ltd and Others (J38/2021) [2021] ZALCJHB 6; (2021) 42 ILJ 1256 (LC); [2021] 6 BLLR 627 (LC); 2021 (4) SA 575 (LC) (8 February 2021)
The Labour Court found that it does not have jurisdiction to entertain the applicants' claims against SAA in business rescue without the written consent of the business rescue practitioners or leave of the High Court, as required by section 133 of the Companies Act. The court held that the moratorium on legal proceedings is a central feature of business rescue, intended to provide breathing space for the company and to protect the interests of all stakeholders, including creditors and shareholders. The applicants' reliance on the BCEA and LRA does not override the Companies Act's moratorium,…
Source excerpt
Explore more
