South Africa Case Law

Segalo v Botha N.O. and Others; Botha N.O. and Another v Segalo and Others (2020/11582; 2019/44572)

Segalo v Botha N.O. and Others; Botha N.O. and Another v Segalo and Others (2020/11582; 2019/44572) [2021] ZAGPJHC 770 (6 December 2021)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2020/11582; 2019/44572

Judge

K.E. Matojane

The court held that section 386 of the Companies Act 61 of 1973 is not unconstitutional and invalid for failing to provide judicial oversight over the sale of residential immovable property owned by liquidated companies. The constitutional protections under sections 26 and 34 do not extend to juristic persons, and the sale of company-owned property does not implicate the right to housing or access to courts for natural persons residing in such property. The court distinguished the present facts from cases such as Lesapo, Zondi, and Jaftha, which dealt with self-help and deprivation of housing…

Source excerpt

• Judicial Oversight
• Right Of Access To Courts
• Right To Housing
• Liquidation Of Companies
• Sale Of Residential Property
• Rule 46a Application

Chater Developments v Waterkloof Marina Estates and Another (1025/2013)

Chater Developments v Waterkloof Marina Estates and Another (1025/2013) [2014] ZASCA 198; 2015 (5) SA 138 (SCA) (28 November 2014)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1025/2013

Judges

Navsa ADP, Theron, Wallis, Mbha JJA, Dambuza AJA

The SCA held that a bona fide purchase from an unauthorised liquidator was valid under section 82(8) of the Insolvency Act, read with section 339 of the Companies Act.

• Liquidation Of Companies
• Powers Of Liquidator
• Sale Of Assets In Liquidation
• Good Faith Purchaser
• Application Of Insolvency Act
• Company-liquidation

Waterkloof Marina Estates (Pty) Ltd v Charter Development (Pty) Ltd and Others (64309/2009)

Waterkloof Marina Estates (Pty) Ltd v Charter Development (Pty) Ltd and Others (64309/2009) [2013] ZAGPPHC 543 (10 May 2013)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

64309/2009

Judge

Pretorius

The High Court held that a liquidator’s sale of shares to a bona fide purchaser was valid and enforceable under section 82(8) of the Insolvency Act.

• Liquidation Of Companies
• Authority Of Liquidator
• Sale Of Company Shares
• Application Of Insolvency Act
• Administrative Action
• Enforceability Of Contract

Du Plessis NO and Another v Rolfes Ltd. (500/94)

Du Plessis NO and Another v Rolfes Ltd. (500/94) [1996] ZASCA 45; 1997 (2) SA 354 (SCA); [1996] 2 All SA 390 (A); (29 March 1996)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

500/94

Judges

Botha, Hefer, Nestadt, Harms, Zulman

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that liquidators had not elected to continue with nominated sub-contracts, and the subcontractor’s claim was not a cost of administration.

• Liquidation Of Companies
• Executory Contracts
• Doctrine Of Election
• Estoppel
• Costs Of Administration
• Liquidation-of-companies