South Africa Case Law

Prudential Authority v Jafta (1219/2018)

Prudential Authority v Jafta (1219/2018) [2023] ZAECQBHC 4 (31 January 2023)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Gqeberha

Case number

1219/2018

Judge

V P Noncembu

The court held that the respondent's failure to comply with the repayment directive issued under section 83(1) of the Banks Act constitutes an act of insolvency as per section 83(3)(b). The respondent's argument regarding prescription was dismissed, as sequestration proceedings are not for the enforcement of a debt and thus not subject to prescription. The applicant's locus standi was confirmed, with the Deputy Registrar empowered to act and the substitution of the Prudential Authority statutorily mandated. The directive was validly issued, and the absence of the true amount in the directive…

Source excerpt

• Banks Act Section 83
• Insolvency Act Section 9
• Prescription Act Section 11
• Locus Standi
• Failure To Disclose Cause Of Action

SA Retail Properties (Pty) Ltd v Englezakis (66282/18)

SA Retail Properties (Pty) Ltd v Englezakis (66282/18) [2019] ZAGPPHC 235 (20 June 2019)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

66282/18

Judge

G Jacobs

The High Court provisionally sequestrated Nicola Englezakis’s estate, finding insolvency or acts of insolvency and prima facie advantage to creditors.

• Provisional Sequestration
• Insolvency Act Section 9
• Locus Standi
• Advantage To Creditors
• Nulla Bona Return
• Provisional-sequestration

Standard Bank of South Africa Limited v Pillay and Others (4759/2014)

Standard Bank of South Africa Limited v Pillay and Others (4759/2014) [2018] ZAKZDHC 4 (20 March 2018)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

4759/2014

Judge

Olsen

The court found that the respondents failed to prove that the second, limited deed of suretyship novated or amended the earlier unlimited deed. There was no express declaration of novation, nor any evidence that both parties intended the second deed to extinguish the obligations under the first. The unlimited deed expressly allowed for coexistence with other suretyships and specified the procedures for termination or limitation, none of which were followed. The second deed did not reference the first or declare itself as a replacement or amendment. The court held that both deeds could co-exis…

Source excerpt

• Provisional Sequestration
• Suretyship Liability
• Novation
• Insolvency Act Section 9
• Balance Of Probabilities

First Rand Bank Ltd t/a First National Bank v Naidoo and Another, South African Bank of Athens v Naidoo (3869/2010, 8118/2010)

First Rand Bank Ltd t/a First National Bank v Naidoo and Another, South African Bank of Athens v Naidoo (3869/2010, 8118/2010) [2011] ZAKZDHC 3 (14 February 2011)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

3869/2010, 8118/2010

Judge

K. Swain

The court found that the applicant had established, on a balance of probabilities, that there are reasons for thinking that as a result of enquiry under the Insolvency Act, assets may be revealed or recovered for the benefit of creditors. Discrepancies and omissions in the respondent's statements of assets and liabilities, including undeclared interests in horses and immovable property, supported the conclusion that further investigation could benefit creditors. The respondent's alternative suggestion of interrogation under Section 152 was rejected due to his failure to fully disclose his fin…

Source excerpt

• Final Sequestration
• Advantage To Creditors
• Insolvency Act Section 9
• Statement Of Assets And Liabilities
• Costs Of Sequestration