South Africa Case Law

Nedbank Limited v Master of the High Court, Cape Town and Others (11689/2018)

Nedbank Limited v Master of the High Court, Cape Town and Others (11689/2018) [2019] ZAWCHC 180 (12 December 2019)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

11689/2018

Judge

Mangcu-Lockwood

The court found that the Master's reliance on African Life and Townsend was correct, as the identity of a juristic entity is determined by its registration number. The deed of suretyship referenced a defunct registration number and thus was not binding on the existing corporation. The applicant failed to discharge the onus required for rectification, as there was insufficient evidence of a mutual error or common intention to bind the correct entity. The application for a stay of liquidation proceedings was also dismissed, as the applicant did not establish a prima facie case or provide adequa…

Source excerpt

• Rectification Of Suretyship
• Expungement Of Claim
• Company Conversion
• Formal Requirements For Suretyship
• Stay Of Liquidation Proceedings

African National Congress v Steenkamp N.O and Others (12036/2013)

African National Congress v Steenkamp N.O and Others (12036/2013) [2014] ZAWCHC 80 (30 May 2014)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

12036/2013

Judge

J Cloete

The High Court dismissed an application to expunge a proven insolvency claim, holding the applicant lacked locus standi and the claim complied with section 44(4).

• Proof Of Claim
• Locus Standi
• Expungement Of Claim
• Insolvency Act Section 44
• Dispositions Without Value
• Insolvency-law

Van Zyl NO and Others v Master of the High Court of South Africa, Western Cape High Court and Another (2876/2012)

Van Zyl NO and Others v Master of the High Court of South Africa, Western Cape High Court and Another (2876/2012) [2012] ZAWCHC 361 (26 November 2012)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

2876/2012

Judge

Davis

The court found that the claim by Great Force Investments was based on simulated transactions and perjured evidence, as established by uncontested facts from the section 417 inquiry and admissions by key witnesses. The evidence showed collusion to convert Great Force from a concurrent to a secured creditor through backdated and false documentation. The Master failed to apply the correct legal standard, which requires expungement of claims where there is a reasonable belief, based on facts, that the claim is not genuine. The court held that the Master should have disallowed the claim and left…

Source excerpt

• Insolvency Act Review
• Expungement Of Claim
• Simulated Transactions
• Perjury In Proof Of Claim
• Liquidation Procedure