South Africa Case Law

Hyprop Investments Limited and Another v NSC Carriers and Forwarding CC; Hyprop Investments Limited and Another v Costa (2015/29277; 2015/29278)

Hyprop Investments Limited and Another v NSC Carriers and Forwarding CC; Hyprop Investments Limited and Another v Costa (2015/29277; 2015/29278) [2017] ZAGPJHC 19 (10 February 2017)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2015/29277; 2015/29278

Judge

C G Lamont

The court granted final winding-up of a close corporation and provisional sequestration of an individual debtor, rejecting illiquid counterclaim defences.

• Winding Up Of Close Corporation
• Final Sequestration Order
• Illiquid Counterclaim
• Judgment Debt Enforcement
• Creditor Rights
• Winding-up-of-close-corporation

Yardley v Watson and Another (6717/2016)

Yardley v Watson and Another (6717/2016) [2016] ZAWCHC 146 (28 October 2016)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

6717/2016

Judge

Binns-Ward

The court found that the written loan agreement, when interpreted contextually and objectively, constituted a binding suretyship obligation by the first respondent, Adrian Watson, in his personal capacity. The language of paragraph 6, together with the structure and wording of the contract, indicated that Watson undertook to stand as surety and co-principal debtor for the obligations of Bedshelf. The court rejected the respondents' argument that the agreement only contemplated a future suretyship or that Watson signed only in a representative capacity. The parol evidence rule precluded relian…

Source excerpt

• Final Sequestration Order
• Suretyship
• Parol Evidence Rule
• Contractual Interpretation

Nedbank Limited v Maloka N.O (2014/23242)

Nedbank Limited v Maloka N.O (2014/23242) [2015] ZAGPPHC 391 (17 May 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2014/23242

Judge

Twala

The High Court dismissed a postponement request and granted final sequestration of the deceased estate, finding the executrix had ample time and had not properly administered the estate.

• Final Sequestration Order
• Postponement Of Hearing
• Estate Insolvency
• Liquidation And Distribution Account
• Final-sequestration-order
• Postponement-of-hearing

Gilfillan t/a Grahamstown Veterinary Clinic and Another v Bowker (1746/2011)

Gilfillan t/a Grahamstown Veterinary Clinic and Another v Bowker (1746/2011) [2012] ZAECGHC 11; 2012 (4) SA 465 (ECG) (12 March 2012)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

Case number

1746/2011

Judge

GG Goosen

The court found that the applicant had established a liquidated claim against the respondent in excess of R100.00, based on admitted misappropriation of funds. The respondent was factually insolvent, as her tender to pay was not from her own resources. The respondent's argument that the pending criminal proceedings justified discharge of the provisional order was rejected, as no exceptional circumstances or substantive application for a stay were presented, and statutory safeguards under the Insolvency Act protect against self-incrimination. The tender did not negate advantage to creditors, a…

Source excerpt

• Final Sequestration Order
• Liquidated Claim
• Advantage To Creditors
• Stay Of Proceedings
• Misappropriation Of Funds

High Point Trading 733 Bk t/a High Point Bridging v Potgieter (2270/2010)

High Point Trading 733 Bk t/a High Point Bridging v Potgieter (2270/2010) [2011] ZAFSHC 70 (12 April 2011)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

2270/2010

Judge

C Van Zyl

The court found that the applicant did not strictly satisfy the requirements of section 8(b) of the Insolvency Act due to deficiencies in the sheriff's return. However, the evidence established factual insolvency: the respondent failed to pay a judgment debt, did not deny insolvency, and did not provide any details of assets or liabilities to rebut the applicant's case. The respondent's written consent to judgment and the absence of substantive opposition to the applicant's claims further supported the applicant's case. The court was satisfied that sequestration would be to the advantage of c…

Source excerpt

• Final Sequestration Order
• Insolvency Act Section 8b
• Judgment Debt
• Advantage To Creditors
• Nulla Bona Return

Kaufman v Standardbank Van Suid-Afrika Bpk. (316/93)

Kaufman v Standardbank Van Suid-Afrika Bpk. (316/93) [1994] ZASCA 107 (8 September 1994)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

316/93

Judges

Nienaber, Hefer, Vivier, F H Grosskopf, Harms

The court refused condonation for late prosecution of an appeal against a sequestration order, finding repeated rule breaches and inadequate explanations.

• Sequestration Procedure
• Condonation Of Non Compliance
• Final Sequestration Order
• Appellate Rules
• Creditor Claims
• Condonation-of-non-compliance