South Africa Case Law

East London Industrial Development Zone (Soc) Ltd v Wild Coast Abalone (Pty) Ltd and Another (EL536/2019)

East London Industrial Development Zone (Soc) Ltd v Wild Coast Abalone (Pty) Ltd and Another (EL536/2019) [2023] ZAECELLC 37 (30 November 2023)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, East London Local Court

Case number

EL536/2019

Judge

T.V Norman

The court dismissed a Rule 30 challenge to an amendment substituting Aqua Management Systems for Andre Bok, finding the amendment permissible and non-prejudicial.

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Substitution Of Parties
• Partnership Liability
• Rule 30 Irregular Proceedings
• Amendment-of-pleadings
• Substitution-of-parties

Competition Commission of South Africa v Bluecollar Occupational Health (Pty) Ltd (COVCR114Sep20)

Competition Commission of South Africa v Bluecollar Occupational Health (Pty) Ltd (COVCR114Sep20) [2023] ZACT 16 (3 April 2023)

Court

Competition Tribunal

Case number

COVCR114Sep20

Judges

M Mazwai, A Wessels, A Ndoni

The Tribunal found that BlueCollar, acting in partnership with Ateltico, acquired temporary market power in the urgent supply of hand sanitiser to SAPS during the Covid-19 pandemic. BlueCollar's pricing was significantly above competitive benchmarks, with a gross margin of 42% and a mark-up of 73%, compared to the appropriate benchmark of 10% to 15% for resellers. The price charged was more than double the National Treasury's list price. BlueCollar failed to justify the reasonableness of its pricing, and Ateltico's profit share could not be treated as a finance cost but as partnership profit…

Source excerpt

• Excessive Pricing
• Covid 19 Regulations
• Dominance
• Administrative Penalty
• Partnership Liability

Singh and Another v Progressive Compliance Fund and Others (24848/2021)

Singh and Another v Progressive Compliance Fund and Others (24848/2021) [2023] ZAGPJHC 35 (19 January 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

24848/2021

Judge

ML Senyatsi

The court made three arbitration awards orders of court, granted indemnity to Ms Singh, and dismissed attempts to hold two respondents jointly liable.

• Arbitration Award Enforcement
• Partnership Liability
• Non Joinder
• Once And For All Rule
• Suretyship Indemnity
• Arbitration-award-enforcement

Law Society of the Northern Provinces v Cowling and Another (69300/13)

Law Society of the Northern Provinces v Cowling and Another (69300/13) [2016] ZAGPPHC 711 (16 August 2016)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

69300/13

Judges

N V Khumalo, P D Moseamo

The High Court struck off two attorneys for serious trust-account misconduct, including a large trust deficit, inadequate accounting records, and multiple Fidelity Fund claims.

• Attorneys Act 53 Of 1979
• Misappropriation Of Trust Funds
• Professional Misconduct
• Fidelity Fund Claims
• Striking Off Application
• Partnership Liability

Haffejee v Bytes Technology Group South Africa and Others (18439/13)

Haffejee v Bytes Technology Group South Africa and Others (18439/13) [2016] ZAWCHC 61 (24 May 2016)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

18439/13

Judge

Sher

The court found that the applicant provided a reasonable and acceptable explanation for his default, having exited the partnership before the debts were incurred and not being personally served with the summons. He set out a bona fide defence with some prospect of success, as he was not party to the agreements giving rise to the debt. The respondent's estoppel argument was not sufficiently established on the papers, as there was no clear evidence that the applicant or his partners represented to the respondent that he remained a partner. Furthermore, the judgment was incorrectly granted again…

Source excerpt

• Rescission Of Default Judgment
• Rule 31 5 D
• Estoppel
• Partnership Liability
• Good Cause Requirement

Osborne v Cockin and Others; Osborne v Cockin N.O. and Others (5618/2015, 6053/2015)

Osborne v Cockin and Others; Osborne v Cockin N.O. and Others (5618/2015, 6053/2015) [2016] ZAECGHC 19 (12 April 2016)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

Case number

5618/2015, 6053/2015

Judge

J.D. Pickering

The court found that the applicant had established a strong prima facie case for the confirmation of the Anton Piller order and interim interdict. Documentary evidence, including a facility agreement signed by Marioth Janet Cockin as a partner, contradicted her denial of involvement in Cockin Partners and undermined the credibility of both Marioth and Mark William Cockin. The court concluded that their false denials were attempts to distance themselves and the Cockin Trust from Shaun Cockin's fraudulent conduct. The evidence showed significant intermingling of business operations among the Co…

Source excerpt

• Anton Piller Order
• Provisional Sequestration
• Partnership Liability
• Trust Insolvency
• Fraudulent Misappropriation

Bright Ideas Projects 249 CC v Sanker and Others (9258/2009)

Bright Ideas Projects 249 CC v Sanker and Others (9258/2009) [2014] ZAKZPHC 48 (19 September 2014)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

9258/2009

Judge

M R Chetty

The court held three defendants jointly liable for a diesel debt, finding the plaintiff was led to believe it contracted with a partnership, not a company.

• Partnership Liability
• Joint And Several Liability
• Verbal Contract
• Credit Facility
• Default Judgment
• Partnership-liability

Smeets v Herman Grobler en Vennote and Others (41170/14 , 6837/2014)

Smeets v Herman Grobler en Vennote and Others (41170/14 , 6837/2014) [2014] ZAGPPHC 508 (2 July 2014)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

41170/14 , 6837/2014

Judge

C.P. Rabie

Urgent relief for repayment of trust monies was postponed, while the related disciplinary application against an attorney was granted.

• Urgent Interdict
• Trust Account Liability
• Partnership Liability
• Disciplinary Proceedings
• Attorney Suspension
• Urgent-interdict

Basson v Niemann and Others (150/2012)

Basson v Niemann and Others (150/2012) [2012] ZASCA 203 (30 November 2012)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

150/2012

Judges

Mpati, Nugent, Malan, Leach, Theron

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the respondents had acquired knowledge of all facts material to their claim against the appellant more than three years before the service of summons. The respondents made payments to investors in 2006, at which point they were aware of the appellant's conduct and their liability. Their reliance on the appellant's assurances and their failure to investigate the merits earlier did not prevent prescription from running, as reasonable care would have revealed the material facts. The argument that the partnership continued after incorporation was rejected, as…

Source excerpt

• Prescription Act
• Partnership Liability
• Special Plea Of Prescription
• Professional Negligence
• Trust Account Mismanagement

Nair v Chandler (13650/06)

Nair v Chandler (13650/06) [2006] ZAGPHC 68; 2007 (1) SA 44 (T) (19 July 2006)

Court

High Courts - Gauteng

Case number

13650/06

Judge

Mavundla

Summary judgment was refused in a partnership reimbursement dispute because the claim lacked allegations of winding-up and accounting after termination.

• Summary Judgment
• Partnership Liability
• Actio Pro Socio
• Winding Up Of Partnership
• Reimbursement Of Partner
• Liquidated Claim