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
First Rand Bank Ltd and Another v Azrapart (Pty) Ltd and Another (4437/2024) [2025] ZAFSHC 162 (5 June 2025)
The court placed Azrapart under business rescue after finding it financially distressed and unconvinced by claims of an imminent R2.6 billion Redcore funding injection.
Piper and Another v Glosam Manganese (Pty) Ltd and Others (2024/069923; 2024/053300) [2025] ZAGPJHC 63 (10 January 2025)
The court found that Glosam Manganese (Pty) Ltd is financially distressed, with substantial debts and no income due to the unlawful diversion of funds by Piper and Neethling. The procedural requirements for business rescue under section 129 were met, and any minor non-compliance was not prejudicial. The allegations of conspiracy and lack of independence or skill on the part of the BRPs were not established on the papers. The application to set aside the business rescue resolution and remove the BRPs was dismissed. The business rescue application for Wepex Trading (Pty) Ltd was also dismissed,…
Source excerpt
Weidlich v Geo-x (Pty) Ltd Bal Logistics (Pty) Ltd and Others (030448/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 192 (28 February 2024)
The High Court placed Geo-X (Pty) Ltd under business rescue, finding financial distress and a reasonable prospect of rescue, and dismissed the claim against Eskom SOC (Pty) Ltd for misjoinder.
Ilitha Group Holdings Proprietary Limited v Sunrise Energy Proprietary Limited and Others (19854/2022) [2023] ZAWCHC 331 (14 December 2023)
Business rescue application dismissed after the court found Sunrise Energy was not financially distressed and that the case was driven by shareholder disagreement.
Moodley v Adzam Trading 48 (PTY) Limited and Others (32779/2020) [2022] ZAGPJHC 995 (19 December 2022)
The High Court set aside Adzam’s voluntary business rescue resolution, finding no reasonable basis to believe the company was financially distressed.
Cassim N.O and Another v Strategic Investment Group Africa Asset Finance (Pty) Ltd and Others (2021/54279) [2022] ZAGPPHC 849 (8 November 2022)
The court dismissed an urgent bid to place a company into business rescue, finding no financial distress, no urgency, and awarding attorney-and-client costs.
Venter v M K Africa Plant and Equipment Pty (Ltd) (62712/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 53 (24 January 2022)
The High Court placed M K Africa Plant and Equipment Pty (Ltd) under business rescue and appointed an interim practitioner, finding the company financially distressed.
Black Sheep Capital (Pty) Ltd and Another v H and H Specialised Services (Pty) Ltd and Another (21766/21) [2021] ZAGPPHC 885 (24 November 2021)
Urgent business rescue application dismissed after the court found the applicants had not shown financial distress or a sufficient basis for relief.
Blue Nightingale 709 (Pty) Ltd v Nkwe Platinum South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Others (28760/21) [2021] ZAGPJHC 660 (9 November 2021)
The High Court dismissed a challenge to Nkwe SA’s business rescue resolution, finding the board was quorate and the shareholders’ agreement could not override the MOI.
Revfin (Pty) Ltd v IMC Distributors Africa (Pty) Ltd t/a International Marketing Concepts and Another (D1608/2021) [2021] ZAKZDHC 51 (29 July 2021)
The court found that, for purposes of jurisdiction in business rescue applications under the Companies Act 2008, a company resides only at its registered office. The first respondent's registered office is in Sasolburg, and thus the Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban, lacks jurisdiction. Even if jurisdiction were present, the applicant failed to establish that the first respondent is financially distressed, as there was no evidence of insolvency or inability to pay debts within the next six months. The applicant also failed to provide a factual foundation for a reasonable prospect of rescuing t…
Source excerpt
Explore more
