South Africa Case Law

Van Wyk v Daberas Adventures CC (1431/2016)

Van Wyk v Daberas Adventures CC (1431/2016) [2018] ZANCHC 31 (1 June 2018)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

1431/2016

Judges

Williams, Olivier, Mamosebo

The court held that the appellant was properly authorised by all serving trustees to institute proceedings on behalf of the trust. The absence of Mr B C Van Wyk, who had ceased to be a trustee due to sequestration, did not invalidate the resolution, as unanimous decisions by all serving trustees were permissible under the trust deed. The delegation of the power to institute proceedings was valid, as it did not amount to an abdication of fundamental discretionary powers and was not prohibited by the trust deed. The failure to join all trustees as applicants was not fatal, as there was clear ev…

Source excerpt

• Trustee Authorisation
• Locus Standi
• Joinder Of Trustees
• Delegation Of Trustee Powers

Swart v Starbuck and Others (CCT153/16)

Swart v Starbuck and Others (CCT153/16) [2017] ZACC 23; 2017 (10) BCLR 1325 (CC); 2017 (5) SA 370 (CC) (29 June 2017)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT 153/16

Judges

Mogoeng, Nkabinde, Cameron, Froneman, Jafta, Khampepe, Madlanga, Mhlantla, Mojapelo, Pretorius, Zondo

Condonation for late filing was granted as the delay was satisfactorily explained and caused no prejudice. Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant’s damages claim under section 82(8) of the Insolvency Act was premised on the absence of valid authorisation by the Master, but the Master’s authorisation for the sale of the properties was legally valid and had not been set aside. The sale agreements were subject to suspensive conditions and only became binding upon fulfilment, which occurred after the trustees’ appointment and the Master’s authorisation. The applicant failed to challeng…

Source excerpt

• Insolvency Act Section 80bis
• Trustee Authorisation
• Administrative Action Review
• Sale Of Insolvent Property
• Condonation
• Statutory Damages

Robin N.O and Others v Serame (A5005/2015)

Robin N.O and Others v Serame (A5005/2015) [2015] ZAGPJHC 261 (16 November 2015)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A5005/2015

Judges

Satchwell, Makume, Wepener

The appeal succeeded because the court found that both trusts existed at the time of contracting, with one misnamed, and the registration numbers were correctly reflected in the agreement. The trustees had intended to enter into the contract and had authorised the signatories, even though no written resolutions were produced. The absence of a formal claim for rectification did not render the agreement unenforceable, as the facts entitled the court to correct the misnaming. The respondent's allegations of misrepresentation and lack of trustee authorisation were not substantiated on the papers,…

Source excerpt

• Rectification Of Contract
• Trustee Authorisation
• Sale Of Shares
• Misrepresentation
• Motion Proceedings
• Parol Evidence Rule

Eybers NO v Beaufort West Minerals (11584/2010)

Eybers NO v Beaufort West Minerals (11584/2010) [2011] ZAWCHC 191 (1 April 2011)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

11584/2010

Judge

Fourie

The High Court granted the respondent leave to appeal, finding the matter important and capable of a different view on appeal.

• Leave To Appeal
• Locus Standi
• Trustee Authorisation
• Contract Interpretation
• Leave-to-appeal
• Locus-standi