South Africa Case Law

Nebavest 1 (Pty) Ltd t/a Minster Consulting v Central Plaza Investments 202 (Pty) Ltd and Others (4212/2017)

Nebavest 1 (Pty) Ltd t/a Minster Consulting v Central Plaza Investments 202 (Pty) Ltd and Others (4212/2017) [2023] ZAWCHC 69; [2023] 2 All SA 795 (WCC) (12 April 2023)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

4212/2017

Judge

Binns-Ward

The court found that the applicant failed to satisfy the good faith requirement under s 165(5)(b)(i) of the Companies Act. The applicant's allegations were superficial, vague, and unsupported by credible evidence. The applicant did not confront or address material evidence from prior related proceedings, and its delay in bringing the application was unexplained. The court held that the claims for breach of fiduciary duty against the directors were time-barred under s 77(7) of the Companies Act, which creates an absolute time bar. The applicant's reliance on an alleged oral agreement was impro…

Source excerpt

• Derivative Actions
• Companies Act 2008
• Director Fiduciary Duties
• Prescription And Time Bars
• Rectification Of Contracts

Silostrat (Pty) Ltd & Others v Pieter Hendrik Strydom N.O & Others (845/2019, 898/2019)

Silostrat (Pty) Ltd & Others v Pieter Hendrik Strydom N.O & Others (845/2019, 898/2019) [2021] ZASCA 93 (25 June 2021)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

845/2019 and 898/2019

Judges

Ponnan, Dambuza, Nicholls, Gorven, Mabindla-Boqwana

The Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed competing appeals over cession ranking, holding Standard Bank’s cession did not cover the 2015 maize proceeds and rectification failed.

• Cession Of Rights
• Rectification Of Contracts
• Ranking Of Creditors
• Insolvency Proceedings
• Interpretation Of Legal Documents
• Cession-of-rights

Nedbank Limited v Soodho N.O and Others (2115/2016)

Nedbank Limited v Soodho N.O and Others (2115/2016) [2021] ZAKZDHC 7 (12 March 2021)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

2115/2016

Judge

Olsen

The court found that the deeds of suretyship executed by Mr Soodhoo and the Trust are valid and enforceable. The absence of Mrs Soodhoo's written consent does not invalidate the suretyships because they were executed in the ordinary course of Mr Soodhoo's business as a property investor, as established by both the evidence and relevant case law. Even if written consent was required, the bank did not know and could not reasonably have known that it was lacking, so the transaction is deemed to have occurred with the required consent under section 15(9)(a) of the Matrimonial Property Act. The co…

Source excerpt

• Suretyship Liability
• Matrimonial Property Act
• Mortgage Bond Enforcement
• Rectification Of Contracts
• Misrepresentation
• Common Mistake

Investec Bank Limited v O'shea N.O (10038/2014)

Investec Bank Limited v O'shea N.O (10038/2014) [2020] ZAWCHC 158 (16 November 2020)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

10038/2014

Judge

Binns-Ward

The High Court partly granted a rule 35 discovery application, limiting further disclosure to specific loan, security, and mortgage-bond documents.

• Discovery Of Documents
• Relevance In Discovery
• Suretyship Liability
• Rectification Of Contracts
• Discovery-of-documents
• Relevance-in-discovery

Nedbank Limited v Chapter II Farm (Pty) Ltd and Others (31150/11)

Nedbank Limited v Chapter II Farm (Pty) Ltd and Others (31150/11) [2016] ZAGPPHC 228 (12 April 2016)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

31150/11

Judge

J W Louw

The High Court held that Nedbank failed to prove the suretyships covered Farm’s overdraft debt, finding no consensus ad idem on the scope of liability.

• Suretyship Liability
• Consensus Ad Idem
• Rectification Of Contracts
• General Law Amendment Act
• Contractual Mistake
• Suretyship-liability

Megafreight Services (Pty) Ltd v Lombard Insurance Company Limited and Another (82748/14)

Megafreight Services (Pty) Ltd v Lombard Insurance Company Limited and Another (82748/14) [2015] ZAGPPHC 650 (11 September 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

82748/14

Judge

Tlhapi VV

The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal, holding that PM1 was a suretyship on its terms and that rectification had not been pleaded.

• Suretyship
• Guarantee Vs Suretyship
• Rectification Of Contracts
• Interpretation Of Contracts
• Guarantee-vs-suretyship
• Rectification-of-contracts

South African Local Government Association v Independent Municipal and Allied Trade Union and Others (JA46/2012)

South African Local Government Association v Independent Municipal and Allied Trade Union and Others (JA46/2012) [2014] ZALAC 135 (4 March 2014)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA46/2012

Judges

Waglay, C J Musi, Mokgoatlheng

The Labour Appeal Court held that no binding collective agreement had been reached on 20 April 2010 and that rectification was unavailable.

• Collective Agreements
• Rectification Of Contracts
• Bargaining Council Constitution
• Custom And Practice
• Binding Effect Of Agreements
• Collective-agreements

UASA- The Union and Others v Lonmin Platinum (JS 1193/09)

UASA- The Union and Others v Lonmin Platinum (JS 1193/09) [2011] ZALCJHB 107; (2012) 33 ILJ 1491 (LC) (5 December 2011)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS 1193/09

Judge

Boqwana

The court found that the applicants failed to establish prima facie evidence of the existence of an oral agreement regarding overtime calculation based on the TCTC package. UASA did not lead evidence demonstrating it had the requisite authority to conclude such an oral agreement on behalf of its members, nor was there evidence that individual applicants accepted the alleged benefits. The essential elements of a binding oral contract were not proven, as there was no clear offer, acceptance, or communication of the agreement to the individual applicants. The written wage agreement did not refle…

Source excerpt

• Collective Agreements
• Oral Contracts
• Locus Standi
• Absolution From The Instance
• Rectification Of Contracts

Dede Pine and Timber Products CC v Blick South Africa (Pty) Ltd (AR 226/11)

Dede Pine and Timber Products CC v Blick South Africa (Pty) Ltd (AR 226/11) [2011] ZAKZPHC 56 (1 September 2011)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

AR 226/11

Judges

Ploos van Amstel, Radebe

The court held that the defendant was deemed to have admitted, through its pleadings and conduct, that it was the party to the rental agreement, despite the omission of 'CC' in the contract name. The evidence established that the equipment was installed at the defendant's premises and that the defendant engaged with the plaintiff regarding the agreement and the equipment. The omission of the abbreviation 'CC' was immaterial, as the parties clearly intended to contract with each other, and the defendant's own admissions and conduct confirmed this. The appeal was found to be frivolous and witho…

Source excerpt

• Contractual Liability
• Pleadings And Admissions
• Close Corporations Act
• Rectification Of Contracts

Khasu Engineering (Pty) Ltd v Naledi Local Municipality and Others (1201/10)

Khasu Engineering (Pty) Ltd v Naledi Local Municipality and Others (1201/10) [2010] ZANWHC 26 (30 September 2010)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

1201/10

Judge

A A Landman

The court found that the applicant's claim for payment under interim certificates issued pursuant to the first contract survives the termination of that contract. However, the respondent Naledi Local Municipality established, on the papers and applying the Plascon-Evans rule, that it had overpaid the applicant by R46,094,026.75. The law and the terms of the first contract permit Naledi to set off this overpayment against the applicant's claim. The limitation of set off to 10% per certificate in the second contract does not apply to claims arising under the first contract, as the applicant's c…

Source excerpt

• Contractual Set Off
• Building Contracts
• Interim Payment Certificates
• Rectification Of Contracts