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
ERF 9[...] and 9[...] Meadowdale Pty Ltd v National Empowerment Fund and Others (2018/29383) [2024] ZAGPJHC 988 (1 October 2024)
The High Court granted Meadowdale leave to intervene and held a settlement between the NEF and a liquidator void ab initio for lack of authority.
Liebenberg and Another v Tariomix (Pty) Ltd t/a Forever Diamonds and Gold (In Liquidation) and Others (2167/2024) [2024] ZANWHC 166 (5 June 2024)
The court held that the business rescue application had not been properly made, as there was no evidence of service and notification to all affected parties, and thus section 131(6) of the Companies Act was not triggered to suspend liquidation proceedings. Even if properly made, section 131(6) only suspends the process of realisation and distribution of assets, not the powers or office of the liquidators, who remain obliged to secure assets for creditors. The applicants failed to establish a prima facie right or irreparable harm, as their allegations were broad and unsupported by cogent evide…
Source excerpt
Taljaard and Another v Botha N.O and Others (1094/2022) [2023] ZANCHC 54 (25 August 2023)
The court found that the appeal was moot because the creditors, at properly convened meetings, had validly passed resolutions extending the powers of the liquidators and trustees, rendering the declaratory order of 13 December 2022 of no practical effect. Statutory requirements for notice and publication were met, and there was no legal obligation to notify interested parties by email. The extension of powers was not the subject of the appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal, and thus the jurisdiction of the court under section 18(4) of the Superior Courts Act was not engaged. Even if the decla…
Source excerpt
Taljaard and Another v Land and Agricultural Development Bank of South Africa and Others (1094/2022) [2022] ZANCHC 59 (11 October 2022)
The court found that the exclusion of individuals and trusts from business rescue under Chapter 6 of the Companies Act does not amount to unconstitutional discrimination. The differentiation is rationally connected to a legitimate government purpose, namely, the efficient rescue and recovery of financially distressed companies. The applicants failed to establish that the exclusion denied many natural persons and trusts their right to protection under Chapter 6 or that it resulted in unfair discrimination. The court declined to extend business rescue to natural persons and trusts by way of rea…
Source excerpt
GCC Engineering (Pty) Ltd and Others v Maroos and Others (901/2017) [2018] ZASCA 178; 2019 (2) SA 379 (SCA) (3 December 2018)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that section 131(6) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 suspends only the process of liquidation proceedings, not the winding-up order itself or the appointment and powers of provisional liquidators. The directors of a company in liquidation lose their management powers, which do not revert to them during the suspension period. There is no statutory or common law basis for re-vesting control and management in the directors once a winding-up order has been granted. The Master of the High Court has no role in business rescue proceedings and cannot be required to ove…
Source excerpt
Staden N.O. and Others v Consolidated Auctioneers Pretoria CC and Others (66559/2011) [2016] ZAGPPHC 927 (30 September 2016)
The court found that the provisional liquidators lacked authority to ratify the sale in execution prior to the extension of their powers by the Master on 24 August 2011. Any correspondence or purported ratification before this date was ultra vires and invalid. The sale in execution, although conducted before liquidation, did not result in transfer of ownership, which remained with the company. The default judgment was granted on an unopposed basis due to a misunderstanding of court procedure and lack of proper notice, not wilful default. The applicants provided a reasonable explanation for th…
Source excerpt
Liu v Roering NO and Another (25713/2016) [2016] ZAGPPHC 205 (15 April 2016)
The High Court dismissed an urgent bid to stop liquidators selling a close corporation’s assets, finding the applicant had not shown entitlement to the relief sought.
Garcao v Master of the Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley and Others (185/13) [2015] ZANCHC 10 (8 May 2015)
The court found that the enquiry was properly convened under sections 417 and 418 of the Companies Act, as expressly stated in both the court order and the heading of the subpoena. The Assistant Master acted as a commissioner appointed in terms of section 418, and the proceedings complied with the statutory requirements. The applicant's argument that only the Master could conduct the enquiry was not supported by the wording of the Act or the facts. The applicant failed to provide particularity regarding alleged procedural unfairness and did not demonstrate prejudice. He also failed to address…
Source excerpt
Mncube and Others v Januarie N.O and Others (00674/2015) [2015] ZAGPJHC 32; [2015] 2 All SA 338 (GJ)) (16 February 2015)
The High Court held that provisional liquidators could convene a creditors’ meeting and ordered urgent relief to consider offers for CIDA City Campus.
Papiyana and Others v Master of the High Court and Others (09/9061) [2010] ZAGPJHC 130 (10 December 2010)
The court upheld a section 417/418 enquiry into a company in liquidation, holding that provisional liquidators could seek it and that there was no abuse of process.
Explore more
