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
Van Dyk v DKD Machine Services (Pty) Ltd (Appeal) (25789/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 321 (30 July 2025)
The court dismissed a winding-up application, finding no commercial insolvency and no just-and-equitable basis where exclusion followed the applicant’s resignation.
Fleurmax Konstruksie (Pty) Ltd v Zacon Projects (Pty) Ltd (006278-2025) [2025] ZAGPPHC 502 (16 May 2025)
Unopposed winding-up application dismissed. The court found no proof of insolvency and held liquidation was not appropriate where instalment payment was proposed.
Lafrica Mining (Pty) Ltd and Another v Sightful Coal (1750/2022) [2025] ZAMPMHC 26 (15 May 2025)
The court found that the applicants failed to establish that the respondent is indebted to them. The evidence showed that the agreement and payments were made between the respondent and Inzuzu Trading and Investment Coal, not the applicants. The respondent's opposition was supported by bona fide and reasonable grounds, and the existence of the alleged debt was genuinely disputed. The admissions made by Mokholo, a former director, were properly withdrawn, and the facts presented by the respondent were accepted. The court applied the Plascon-Evans rule and concluded that it would not be just an…
Source excerpt
Pretorius and Others v Khutso Naketsi Communal Property Association and Another (2024-147172) [2025] ZAGPPHC 451 (8 May 2025)
The High Court granted a postponement in winding-up proceedings and ordered the intervening applicants, except the employees, to pay the postponed hearing costs.
Morebudi and Others v Barker and Others (A233/2022) [2025] ZAGPPHC 348 (17 March 2025)
The court held that parties cannot contract out of the statutory provisions of section 81(1)(d) of the Companies Act. Any clause in a shareholders' agreement or joint venture agreement that purports to oust the court's jurisdiction to order winding-up is invalid to the extent of its inconsistency with the Act. The arbitration clause does not preclude the court from adjudicating the winding-up application, especially where the dispute is legal rather than factual and the prescribed dispute resolution process is ineffective. The deadlock between directors and shareholders is complete and irreco…
Source excerpt
Topfix (Pty) Ltd v Go Business (Pty) Ltd and Another (020590/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 115 (30 January 2025)
The High Court granted Topfix a provisional winding-up order against Go Business, finding a prima facie debt, commercial insolvency, and a just-and-equitable basis.
Superior Macadamias (Pty) Ltd and Others v Emvest Agricultural Corporation (Mauritius) Ltd and Another (865/2022) [2024] ZASCA 182 (24 December 2024)
The SCA upheld Superior Macadamias’ appeal for lack of proved indebtedness, but refused condonation for three related companies and left their liquidation orders in place.
Spanogiannis and Another v Emgeo and Another (2024/135403) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1274 (16 December 2024)
Urgent winding-up application granted after the court found Emgeo unable to pay its debts and held that shareholder deadlock made winding up just and equitable.
Ridgeback Engineering Supplies (Pty) Ltd v Expert Machining and Engineering (Pty) Ltd (A2023/035929) [2024] ZAGPJHC 844 (30 August 2024)
The court dismissed a winding-up application, holding that the statutory demand did not comply with section 345 and that the debt was bona fide disputed.
Lipton and Others v Activate Telecoms (Pty) Ltd (2022/018723) [2024] ZAGPJHC 853 (29 August 2024)
The applicants failed to establish on a balance of probabilities that the respondent is indebted to them and unable to pay its debts. The alleged loan is disputed on reasonable grounds, including prescription and lack of mora, and the evidence does not support the existence of a recoverable debt. The court found that liquidation proceedings are not appropriate for debt recovery where a bona fide dispute exists. Regarding oppression, the court held that Lipton's continued access to the respondent's bank account and knowledge of its transactions undermines the claim of being locked out or stone…
Source excerpt
Explore more
