South Africa Case Law

Stratford and Others v Investec Bank Limited and Others (CCT 62/14)

Stratford and Others v Investec Bank Limited and Others (CCT 62/14) [2014] ZACC 38; 2015 (3) BCLR 358 (CC); 2015 (3) SA 1 (CC); (2015) 36 ILJ 583 (CC) (19 December 2014)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT 62/14

Judges

Mogoeng, Moseneke, Cameron, Froneman, Jafta, Khampepe, Leeuw, Madlanga, Nkabinde, Van der Westhuizen, Zondo

Section 9(4A) of the Insolvency Act must be interpreted to include domestic employees, as the term 'employees' is unqualified and a narrow reading would undermine constitutional rights to equality, dignity, and fair labour practices. The Court found that the purpose of notice is to respect the dignity of all employees affected by sequestration, not only those in business contexts. Compliance with section 9(4A) is peremptory, but the method of furnishing notice is directory; it suffices if the petition is made available in a manner reasonably likely to make it accessible to employees. In this…

Source excerpt

• Sequestration Procedure
• Notice To Employees
• Domestic Worker Rights
• Bill Of Rights Limitation
• Advantage To Creditors
• Statutory Interpretation

Hendricks NO and Others v Cape Kingdom (Pty) Ltd (14432/08)

Hendricks NO and Others v Cape Kingdom (Pty) Ltd (14432/08) [2009] ZAWCHC 189; 2010 (5) SA 274 (WCC) (7 December 2009)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

14432/08

Judge

Sholto-Douglas

High Court liquidation case on whether employee notice requirements were substantially complied with under the Companies Act.

• Winding Up Of Company
• Service Of Process
• Substantial Compliance
• Notice To Employees
• Companies Act 1973
• Company-liquidation