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
R.A.S v Jordaan and Others (29014/18) [2025] ZAGPPHC 235 (28 February 2025)
The High Court refused to remove a receiver and liquidator appointed in a divorce settlement, finding the settlement and court order remained binding.
Jonker and Another v Bothaville N.O and Others (901/2025) [2025] ZAFSHC 91 (27 February 2025)
The court found that the Master had taken only one decision, namely the removal of the liquidators under s379(1)(b) of the Companies Act, and that the interim order suspended the operation of the entire decision pending review. The applicants failed to establish any clear or prima facie right to the relief sought, as the Master's decision was fully suspended and the liquidators were entitled to continue with the administration and interrogation. The applicants did not demonstrate any real harm that would result from the interrogation, and their allegations of victimisation and harassment were…
Source excerpt
Kalianjee v Master of the High Court and Others (2022/002933) [2024] ZAGPJHC 858 (29 August 2024)
The Court found that the Master's decision to remove Kalianjee as liquidator of M&M and Creative was procedurally unfair and unlawful. The Master failed to provide adequate reasons, did not identify the specific duties breached, and relied on complaints outside his jurisdiction. The decision was not rationally connected to the facts or the empowering provisions, and Kalianjee was denied a proper opportunity to respond. The review succeeded under PAJA and s 151 of the Insolvency Act. The counter-application to disqualify Kalianjee was dismissed as premature and unsupported by statutory grounds…
Source excerpt
Marks and Another v Bester and Others (12698/22) [2024] ZAWCHC 82 (12 March 2024)
The court found that the applicants failed to establish good and sufficient cause for the removal of the liquidators. The allegations of impropriety, bias, and dereliction of duty were unsupported by evidence. The liquidators acted prudently and in the best interests of the estate and creditors, especially in their handling of claims and tax affairs. The application was deemed an abuse of process, motivated by the first applicant's desire to avoid interrogation, and was not urgent. The respondents' explanations were cogent, and no conflict of interest or lack of independence was demonstrated.…
Source excerpt
Van der Merwe NO and Others v Moodliar NO and Another; Van der Merwe NO and Others v Moodliar NO and Another; Nkhoma NO and Others v Moodliar NO and Others (Gamble J) [2019] ZAWCHC 160; [2020] 1 All SA 558 (WCC) (19 November 2019)
The court dismissed applications to reconsider liquidators’ powers, reopen a liquidation account, remove the liquidators, and challenge their attorneys’ authority.
Motala v Master of the North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria (48748/11) [2017] ZAGPPHC 665 (9 October 2017)
The court found that the Master was both entitled and obliged to conduct enquiries into the applicant's conduct as liquidator under section 381 of the Companies Act, given serious concerns about asset-stripping, employee welfare, and the applicant's failure to cooperate. The applicant was given sufficient notice and opportunity to respond to the Master's enquiries but refused to answer questions regarding the merits of the administration, thereby undermining the Master's statutory duties. The delay in bringing review proceedings regarding the decisions of 20 July and 5 September 2011 was exce…
Source excerpt
Matsela v Moloto (35589/11) [2012] ZAGPJHC 252 (16 October 2012)
The High Court dismissed an application to remove a liquidator, holding that the applicants lacked locus standi and had not proved creditor status under the Co-operatives Act.
Pellow NO and Others v Master of the High Court Johannesburg and Others (21296/11) [2012] ZAGPJHC 270 (9 February 2012)
The High Court reviewed and set aside the Master’s removal of liquidators, holding that a creditor connection alone did not make them unsuitable.
Explore more
