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
Xeon Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Public Investment Corporation SOC Limited and Others (2024/101102) [2024] ZAGPPHC 945 (27 September 2024)
The High Court struck Xeon’s urgent application from the roll, finding the alleged urgency self-created and unsupported, and awarded respondents their costs.
Willemse v Cronje and Others (7608/2023) [2024] ZAWCHC 270 (18 September 2024)
The court found that the applicant's pre-emptive right was triggered by the receipt of the offer to purchase the farm properties, not by the conclusion of the sale agreement. The applicant was entitled to exercise his right by stepping into the position of the third party purchaser, but only on the same terms as those offered to the third respondent, including the sale of movables and improvements. The court held that the structure of the sale agreements was commercially reasonable and not designed to frustrate the applicant's rights. The lease agreement was entered into by the usufructuary,…
Source excerpt
Lisinfo Trading (Pty) Ltd and Others v Lunem Learning Centre (Pty) Ltd and Others (2023-052134) [2023] ZAGPJHC 726 (26 June 2023)
High Court eviction matter from commercial premises used as a school, after lease cancellation for substantial arrear rental and unpaid charges. Leave was also granted for the company’s director to appear.
Davidson v Cough N.O. and Others (41962/2021) [2022] ZAGPJHC 1007 (20 December 2022)
The court found that the executrix failed to comply with the statutory requirements under s35 of the Close Corporations Act for the transfer or sale of the deceased member's interest. The applicant, as the surviving member, has a pre-emptive right to acquire the deceased's interest, and the interests of the intestate heirs are adequately represented by the executrix. The purported offer by the executrix's daughter and partner did not comply with the Act's requirements. The relationship between the applicant and the second respondent had deteriorated to the point of intolerability, justifying…
Source excerpt
Plattekloof RMS Boerdery (Pty) Ltd v Dahlia Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd (667/2021) [2022] ZASCA 182 (15 December 2022)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the sale of the entire farm by the respondent to Swellendam Plase activated the appellant's right of pre-emption under clause 10 of the lease agreement, even though the sale was a global transaction and not limited to the two leased portions. The respondent was contractually obliged to determine in good faith what portion of the global purchase price pertained to the two leased portions and to deliver a written offer to the appellant on that basis. The appellant was not entitled to a predetermined price of R4 million, nor could the court determine a reaso…
Source excerpt
Louriero NO v Combined Ceilings & Partitions CC and Others (29842/2018) [2019] ZAGPJHC 365 (27 August 2019)
The court found that the oral agreement pleaded by the plaintiffs was at variance with the written association agreement, as it introduced a different methodology for determining the value of the deceased member's interest. The oral agreement was not reduced to writing and was not signed by all members, as required by section 44(6) of the Close Corporation Act. The court held that the oral agreement constituted an amendment to the association agreement and was therefore invalid for non-compliance with statutory requirements. Consequently, the particulars of claim were excipiable and the excep…
Source excerpt
Trustees of The Bush Willow Trust v Ilkley Game Ranch CC and Others (40101/2017) [2019] ZAGPJHC 16 (1 February 2019)
The court held that the exceptions to both Claim A and Claim B must be dismissed. In respect of Claim A, the constitution does not require the plaintiff to plead that other members declined to exercise their pre-emptive rights; the right arises upon expiry of the prescribed period if no other member exercises the option. The absence of such an averment is not fatal to the cause of action. For Claim B, the constitution expressly provides that members have locus standi to enforce its provisions and restrain breaches, not only the association itself. The exceptions raised are not dispositive of…
Source excerpt
Wiehahn v Goosen and Others (1202/2017) [2018] ZANCHC 59 (20 April 2018)
The court found that clause 2.3 of the late father's will created an option in favour of the first respondent to purchase the farm Hunitees within three months of the stepmother's death. The purported exercise of this option by the first respondent did not comply with the formalities required by section 2(1) of the Alienation of Land Act, as the note dated 24 January 2017 was insufficient. The subsequent written sale agreement was entered into outside the prescribed period. The court rejected the respondents' argument that clause 2.3 should be read as a pre-emptive right and held that the rig…
Source excerpt
Spar Group Limited and Another v Superand Spar CC t/a Kilner Park Superspar and Others (61163/2017) [2017] ZAGPPHC 598 (11 September 2017)
The court found that the dispute regarding the triggering of pre-emptive rights under the Spar membership agreement and whether a sale agreement had been concluded could not be resolved on the papers due to factual and legal complexities. Exercising its discretion under Rule 6(5)(g), the court referred the matter to trial for full ventilation of the issues. In the interim, the applicants established a strong prima facie case for the existence and threatened infringement of their pre-emptive rights, and satisfied all requirements for an interim interdict. The respondents were interdicted from…
Source excerpt
Daag Investments CC and Others v Sheriff of Roodepoort and Others (2015/19426) [2016] ZAGPJHC 286 (14 October 2016)
The High Court set aside the sale and attachment of a close corporation member’s interest after finding non-compliance with sections 34 and 34A of the Close Corporations Act.
Explore more
