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
Botha N.O and Others v Master of the High Court and Others (480/2025) [2025] ZAFSHC 118 (4 April 2025)
The High Court suspended the Master’s removal of three liquidators pending review, finding a proper case for interim relief and reserving costs for later.
First Time Trading CC v Magistrate for the District of the City of Cape Town sub district Bellville and Others (6222/2024) [2024] ZAWCHC 163 (10 June 2024)
The court found that the applicant's claim had been paid prior to the meeting of creditors, negating its status as a creditor or aggrieved person for purposes of review under section 151 of the Insolvency Act. The application was premature, as statutory remedies under section 45 and 151 had not been exhausted. The alleged procedural irregularities were either unsubstantiated or refuted by evidence, and the applicant conceded most points at the hearing. The nomination and removal of the provisional liquidator were governed by statutory provisions requiring prior recourse to the Master, which t…
Source excerpt
James and Another v Van der Westhuizen N.O and Others (66148/18) [2020] ZAGPPHC 273 (29 June 2020)
The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal, finding no reasonable prospects of success in a dispute over liquidator removal and the handling of a creditor claim.
Trustees for the Time Being of the Bermack Trust ( NO IT 1730/1996) and Another v Patel N.O and Another (9282/2014) [2014] ZAWCHC 105 (8 July 2014)
The court postponed a liquidator-removal application, consolidated it with related liquidation matters, and authorised the co-liquidator to act alone pending hearing.
Karl And Sarah Properties (Pty) Limited v Lane N.O and Others (16766/13) [2014] ZAWCHC 139 (30 April 2014)
The court found that the closure of the second meeting of creditors on 19 January 2012 was irregular, invalid, and unlawful, as it occurred before the date to which the meeting had been adjourned and without proper notice to interested parties. This violated statutory requirements of openness and procedural fairness under the Insolvency Act and PAJA. Consequently, the special and general meetings of creditors held on 8 March 2012, which depended on the prior lawful closure of the second meeting, were also invalid. The proof of claims and resolutions adopted at those meetings were set aside. T…
Source excerpt
Explore more
