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
Marais and Another v Nortiger Logistics-SA (Pty) Ltd and Another (14866/2022) [2025] ZAGPJHC 498 (21 May 2025)
The court set aside the sale of a crane after finding a prior cession invalid and ineffective to transfer ownership, making the disposition voidable in liquidation.
Harry's Tyres (Pty) Ltd v Symes N.O and Others (T801/2019; CIV APP FB 10/23) [2024] ZANWHC 27 (14 February 2024)
The High Court granted an urgent stay of execution pending a condonation application and appeal, finding the applicant would face substantial prejudice if execution proceeded.
Strydom N.O and Others v Le Roux - Reasons (2613/2022) [2023] ZAWCHC 244 (15 September 2023)
Liquidators sought repayment of alleged dispositions without value from an investor. The court refused relief under section 26(1) but granted the alternative section 29 claim.
Moodliar N.O and Others v Lawson Tool Distributors (Pty) Ltd (7855/2016) [2021] ZAWCHC 99; 2022 (2) SA 220 (WCC) (7 May 2021)
The court found that the payments made by Vusela to the defendant were regular, consistent, and in accordance with the terms of the credit facility. The evidence showed that Vusela needed building supplies to continue trading and that the payments were made to maintain its business operations, not to prefer the defendant over other creditors. There was no direct evidence of Vusela's intention to prefer, and the relationship between Vusela and the defendant was entirely at arm's length. The court held that the most plausible inference was that Vusela's dominant intention was to keep its busine…
Source excerpt
Bester NO and Others v Target Brand Orchards (Pty) Ltd and Others (22593/2019) [2020] ZAWCHC 183 (21 December 2020)
The High Court dismissed Funky Fruit’s Rule 30 challenge, refused upliftment of the bar and default judgment, and also refused to compel further particulars from Target Brand.
Akbur and Another v Button NO and Others (AR529/2016) [2017] ZAKZPHC 68 (15 June 2017)
The High Court upheld an appeal against a voidable-preference order, finding the liquidators relied on inadmissible evidence and unresolved disputes of fact.
Griffiths v Janse van Rensburg NO (20269/2014) [2015] ZASCA 158; [2016] 1 All SA 643 (SCA); 2016 (3) SA 389 (SCA) (26 October 2015)
The SCA held that repayments from an unlawful pyramid scheme were not made in the ordinary course of business and upheld setting them aside under insolvency law.
Button N.O and Others v Akbur and Others (14600/2014) [2015] ZAKZDHC 84 (23 September 2015)
The court held that payments by an insolvent close corporation to an insider and related party were voidable preferences and ordered repayment with interest.
Janse Van Rensburg and Another v Griffiths (2101/2002) [2014] ZAECPEHC 20; [2014] 2 All SA 670 (ECP) (25 March 2014)
The court found that the payments made by Usapho Trust to the defendant within six months prior to sequestration were voidable preferences under section 29 of the Insolvency Act. All elements required by section 29 were established, including that the payments constituted dispositions, were made within the relevant period, and preferred the defendant above other creditors. The only remaining issue was whether the payments were made in the ordinary course of business. Applying a broad, objective test and considering the illegal nature of Usapho Trust's business as a pyramid scheme, the court h…
Source excerpt
Gazit Properties (Pty) Ltd v Botha NO and Others (873/2010) [2011] ZASCA 199; 2012 (2) SA 306 (SCA) (23 November 2011)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that repayments made under valid loan agreements were in the ordinary course of business, despite the debtor’s unlawful banking activities.
Explore more
