South Africa Case Law

Chiliza v Govender and Another (1603/2012)

Chiliza v Govender and Another (1603/2012) [2013] ZAKZDHC 14; 2013 (4) SA 600 (KZD) (29 April 2013)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

1603/2012

Judge

Vahed

The court held that while service of the sequestration petition on SARS is peremptory, the requirement to serve the provisional order on SARS under section 11(2A)(c) of the Insolvency Act is not absolute. The absence of a statutory requirement for an affidavit confirming service of the provisional order, and the retention of section 12 in its original form, indicate that non-service of the provisional order does not preclude the granting of a final sequestration order. The legislative purpose—to afford SARS an opportunity to intervene—is substantially achieved by service of the petition. The…

Source excerpt

• Sequestration
• Service On Sars
• Insolvency Act Section 11 2a C
• Rescission Of Order