Smith and Others v One Vision Investments 344 (Pty) Ltd (76711/2014) [2020] ZAGPPHC 316 (25 June 2020)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
76711/2014
Judge
RG Tolmay
The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal, holding that the applicants showed no reasonable prospect of success and that costs should follow the result.
Singh and Others v Companies and Intellectual Property Commission and Others (33482/2016) [2018] ZAGPPHC 12 (19 March 2018)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
33482/2016
Judge
AC Basson
The court held that the decisions by CIPC to accept, investigate, and issue summonses regarding the complaints about director resignations do not constitute administrative action under PAJA, as they do not adversely affect rights or have a direct, external legal effect. The investigation is not time-barred under section 219(1) of the Companies Act because the alleged fraudulent removal of Smith as director constitutes a continuing wrong, and the statutory duty to maintain accurate company records persists. The initial improper service of summons by email was cured by subsequent service via th…
Morwane v Absa Limited and Others (M499/2016) [2017] ZANWHC 48 (6 April 2017)
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Case number
M499/2016
Judge
A M Kgoele
The court dismissed a former director and shareholder’s application for company records and information, finding he no longer had a legal right under section 26.
Ambanc (Pty) Limited t/a Hiref v Sukha and Others (2017/8310) [2017] ZAGPJHC 76 (16 March 2017)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
2017/8310
Judge
L R Adams
The court dismissed urgent competing applications arising from a family company dispute, holding Ambanc lacked authority to sue and that the counter-application could not be decided on the papers.
Viljoen and Another v Rademeyer and Another (15967/2006) [2007] ZAGPHC 38 (25 April 2007)
Court
High Courts - Gauteng
Case number
15967/2006
Judge
Pretorius R
Opposed motion for specific performance over a resignation and share-transfer agreement was referred to trial because material disputes of fact could not be resolved on affidavit.