South Africa Case Law

Mayo NO v De Montlehu (20504/2014)

Mayo NO v De Montlehu (20504/2014) [2015] ZASCA 127; 2016 (1) SA 36 (SCA) (23 September 2015)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

20504/2014

Judges

Bosielo, Leach, Majiedt, Willis, Zondi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that section 366(2) of the Companies Act 61 of 1973 does not override the three-month time period and cost requirements stipulated in section 44(1) of the Insolvency Act 24 of 1936. The court found that the strict interpretation of 'mutatis mutandis' requires that the necessary changes must be required, not merely permitted, and that the time period for proving claims and the associated cost requirements apply equally to company liquidations as to sequestrations. Section 366(2) relates only to participation in a distribution under a particular account and does…

Source excerpt

• Companies Act 1973
• Insolvency Act 1936
• Proof Of Claims
• Late Claims
• Liquidation Procedure

Barnard NO v Van der Merwe (7706/2007 – A767/2009)

Barnard NO v Van der Merwe (7706/2007 – A767/2009) [2011] ZAGPPHC 228; 2012 (3) SA 304 (GNP) (2 December 2011)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

7706/2007 – A767/2009

Judges

EM Makgoba, E Bertelsmann, FG Preller

The High Court held that a surviving spouse had to lodge and prove an accrual claim against the deceased estate, and excluded several assets from the accrual calculation.

• Matrimonial Property Act
• Accrual System
• Estate Administration
• Late Claims
• Ante Nuptial Contract Interpretation
• Accrual-system