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
Standard Bank South Africa Ltd v Remitto (Pty) Ltd and Others (3538/2022; 3540/2022) [2023] ZAFSHC 25 (3 February 2023)
The court converted two business rescue proceedings into liquidation, finding the companies were commercially insolvent and the rescue plans were no longer achievable.
Carmody v Kudumela N.O. and Another (2022/17204;2022/2448) [2022] ZAGPJHC 591 (18 August 2022)
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.
South Cables and Electrical (Pty) Ltd and Another v Walro Flex (Pty) Ltd and Others (2021/49669) [2021] ZAGPJHC 824 (20 December 2021)
The High Court granted leave to challenge business rescue and ordered Walro Flex’s business rescue terminated and converted into liquidation.
Cawood N.O v Murray N.O and Others (A127/19) [2021] ZAGPPHC 859; 2024 (6) SA 222 (GP) (12 December 2021)
The court held that while there is no direct precedent for forfeiture of business rescue practitioners' fees, the inherent power of the court to sanction practitioners for misconduct is established in South African law. The BRPs failed to fulfil their statutory duties under the Companies Act, acted to the detriment of creditors and shareholders, and their conduct warranted censure. However, the court found insufficient evidence to justify setting aside the resolutions placing the companies under business rescue. The order of the court a quo denying the BRPs their fees was set aside, as was th…
Source excerpt
EBM Project (Pty) Ltd and Another v Barak Fund SPC Ltd In re: The Holland Insurance Company Ltd v The Master of the High Court and Others (2021/18884) [2021] ZAGPJHC 384 (14 June 2021)
The court held that the business rescue practitioner, Mr Venter, failed to comply with the mandatory notice requirements under sections 141 and 145 of the Companies Act by proceeding ex parte and not joining affected parties. This omission constituted a jurisdictional defect and rendered the application unlawful. The relief sought, including extended powers for the provisional liquidator and Mr Venter's appointment as consultant, was not competent under the statutory regime. The court found that Mr Venter's conduct was negligent and at odds with his fiduciary duties, warranting a punitive cos…
Source excerpt
Cordeiro Holdings CC and Others v Market Demand Trading 254 (Pty) Ltd and Others (2016/24747) [2016] ZAGPJHC 284 (6 September 2016)
The High Court set aside two companies’ business rescue resolutions and placed them under provisional winding up, finding no reasonable prospect of rescue.
Explore more
