South Africa Case Law

Usher N.O v Abrina 284 (Pty) Limited and Another (15185/22P)

Usher N.O v Abrina 284 (Pty) Limited and Another (15185/22P) [2023] ZAKZPHC 102 (6 October 2023)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

15185/22P

Judge

A.M. Annandale

The court found that the business rescue practitioner had established reasonable grounds for concluding that there was no reasonable prospect of rescuing the respondent. The amended business rescue plan was dependent on a capital injection that was not forthcoming despite multiple extensions. The respondent was commercially insolvent, unable to meet its operational expenses, and alternative avenues suggested by the intervening creditor were speculative and lacked factual foundation. The practitioner had considered and responded to all proposed alternatives, and the facts demonstrated that liq…

Source excerpt

• Business Rescue
• Winding Up
• Companies Act Section 141
• Creditor Rights
• Liquidation Orders

Carmody v Kudumela N.O. and Another (2022/17204;2022/2448)

Carmody v Kudumela N.O. and Another (2022/17204;2022/2448) [2022] ZAGPJHC 591 (18 August 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2022/17204;2022/2448

Judge

S Yacoob

The court refused to remove a business rescue practitioner but converted Matsway Steel's business rescue into final liquidation after finding no credible rescue prospect.

• Business Rescue Practitioner Removal
• Conversion To Liquidation
• Companies Act Section 139
• Companies Act Section 141
• Creditor Rights
• Business-rescue

Carroll v Michael Carroll CC In Re: In the application for the Liquidation of: Michael Carroll CC (under supervision) (2012018808)

Carroll v Michael Carroll CC In Re: In the application for the Liquidation of: Michael Carroll CC (under supervision) (2012018808) [2019] ZAGPPHC 74 (15 March 2019)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2018/22808

Judge

L R Adams

The court found that the approved business rescue plan constituted a compromise, conditional upon the applicant meeting its obligations to the Land Bank as set out in the plan. The plan did not require full payment of all outstanding debts, but rather provided for a higher dividend to the creditor than would have been achieved in liquidation. The plan was approved and implemented, and the applicant was thereby rescued as contemplated by the Companies Act. The Business Rescue Practitioner's interpretation that full payment was required was not supported by the wording of the plan. The requirem…

Source excerpt

• Business Rescue
• Companies Act Section 141
• Creditor Compromise
• Liquidation Proceedings