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
M.H v Symes and Others (5822/2022) [2024] ZAGPJHC 279 (15 March 2024)
High Court review of a liquidation search warrant: the magistrate’s order stood, but opening safes exceeded the warrant and was unlawful.
Ex Parte: Dicks N.O and Another v Nkadimeng and Another [2023] ZAGPPHC 70; 2023-006240 (7 February 2023)
The court found that the trustees had already identified the vehicles and made contact with the respondents, who disputed the trustees' entitlement and referred them to their lawyer. The application was brought ex-parte more than two months after the respondents were made aware of the trustees' intentions. The court held that the audi alteram partem principle applies in cases where property is not concealed but openly held and the right to possession is disputed. The applicants failed to substantiate any real risk that the assets would be destroyed or concealed if notice was given. The author…
Source excerpt
SV Trading CC Virtual Production v Suliman and Another (19614/2021) [2021] ZAGPPHC 228 (10 May 2021)
The High Court held that a credit sale of business assets passed ownership on delivery, with no proved reservation of ownership, and ordered return of the attached assets.
De Beer N.O and Others v Magistrate of Dundee N.O and Others (5148/2020P) [2020] ZAKZPHC 70; [2021] 1 All SA 405 (KZP) (19 November 2020)
High Court review set aside a section 69 Insolvency Act warrant, finding it was applied for before formal appointment and executed unlawfully.
Westmead Carriers CC v Pillay NO and Others (426/2018; 635/2018) [2020] ZAKZPHC 80 (7 February 2020)
The High Court held that search-warrant orders under section 69(3) of the Insolvency Act were final and could not be reconsidered by the magistrates.
Naidoo and Others v Kalianjee N.O and Others (20345/2014) [2015] ZASCA 102; [2015] 3 All SA 679 (SCA); 2016 (2) SA 451 (SCA) (29 June 2015)
The Supreme Court of Appeal upheld a s 69 Insolvency Act search-and-seizure warrant, finding no fatal defects, no abuse of process, and dismissed the appeal.
Erasmus and Others v de Villiers Berrange NO and Others (3369/2013) [2013] ZAFSHC 149 (10 September 2013)
The court found that the applicants failed to establish that the trustees acted unlawfully in obtaining possession of the cows. The trustees acted under a warrant issued by the magistrate in terms of section 69(3) of the Insolvency Act, which authorised removal of property belonging to the insolvent estate. The applicants did not provide sufficient evidence of ownership, as payments were made to entities other than the trust and the independent trustee was not involved in the sales. The court held that the mandament van spolie does not apply where possession is obtained through lawful process…
Source excerpt
Ex parte: Daku NO and Others v Plaswrap (Pty) Ltd (6174/2009) [2010] ZAWCHC 608 (7 December 2010)
The High Court granted liquidators a search-and-seizure order for Plaswrap’s assets, finding the respondent unlawfully withheld them under an unconfirmed sale agreement.
Lubbe v Botha NO and Others (2686/2009) [2009] ZAFSHC 84 (10 September 2009)
The court found that the ownership of the disputed Volvo machinery could not be determined on the papers alone due to conflicting evidence and allegations of simulated transactions and fraudulent schemes. The applicant presented documentation supporting his claim to ownership, but the respondents provided asset registers and evidence of third-party payments, raising serious doubts about the true ownership. Given the complexity and the need for oral testimony and cross-examination, the court held that the matter must be referred for oral evidence to establish the facts regarding ownership. Pen…
Source excerpt
Le Roux and Others v Viana NO and Others (494/06) [2007] ZASCA 173; [2007] SCA 173 (RSA); [2008] 1 All SA 546 (SCA); 2008 (2) SA 173 (SCA) (30 November 2007)
The SCA held that section 69(3) of the Insolvency Act can reach electronic books and documents on a third party’s hard drive, and dismissed the appeal.
Explore more
