South Africa Case Law

Resilient Rock (Pty) Ltd v Voltex (Pty) Ltd t/a Atlas Group (1132/2023)

Resilient Rock (Pty) Ltd v Voltex (Pty) Ltd t/a Atlas Group (1132/2023) [2025] ZASCA 33 (31 March 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1132/2023

Judges

Mbatha, Kathree-Setiloane, Baartman, Vally, Molitsoane

Section 347(5) of the Companies Act 61 of 1973 imposes a peremptory prohibition on any court, including appellate courts, from granting a final winding-up order in respect of a company that is already being wound up by order of court. The full court erred in disregarding the plain meaning of section 347(5) and in concluding that its appellate jurisdiction entitled it to issue a second winding-up order with retrospective effect. The legislative intent is clear: only one winding-up order may be operative at any time, and subsequent courts must give effect to the existence of a prior order. The…

Source excerpt

• Winding Up Orders
• Companies Act Section 347 5
• Jurisdiction Of Appellate Courts
• Concursus Creditorum
• Interpretation Of Statutes

Kets Group (Pty) Ltd v Business Partners Limited (2487/2023)

Kets Group (Pty) Ltd v Business Partners Limited (2487/2023) [2024] ZAECMKHC 131 (3 December 2024)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

2487/2023

Judge

T.V Norman

The court found that Kets Group (Pty) Ltd, through its sole director, had standing to bring the rescission application without the co-operation of the liquidator, consistent with progressive case law. However, the application failed on the merits. The evidence established that Kets was properly served with the winding up application and orders at its registered address and through its attorneys, who had been instructed as early as September 2023. Kets did not provide any reasonable or acceptable explanation for its default in failing to oppose either the provisional or final winding up orders…

Source excerpt

• Winding Up Orders
• Rescission Of Judgment
• Locus Standi
• Commercial Insolvency
• Service Of Process

Arnold v EOH Managed Services PS (Pty) Ltd and Others (24877/2021)

Arnold v EOH Managed Services PS (Pty) Ltd and Others (24877/2021) [2023] ZAGPJHC 158 (7 February 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

24877/2021

Judge

C Todd

The court found that its factual conclusions regarding the identity of the loan creditor were sound and supported by the evidence, including the financial statements and the application of the Plascon Evans rule. Even if another court might reach a different conclusion on the facts, the relief sought by the applicant was discretionary and would only be granted in exceptional circumstances or on good cause shown. The court held that there were formidable obstacles to the applicant persuading another court to exercise its discretion to set aside the previous order converting the winding up to a…

Source excerpt

• Leave To Appeal
• Prospects Of Success
• Discretionary Relief
• Winding Up Orders

Ragavan and Another v Kal Tire Mining Services SA (Pty) Ltd and Others (40723/2018)

Ragavan and Another v Kal Tire Mining Services SA (Pty) Ltd and Others (40723/2018) [2019] ZAGPPHC 455 (12 August 2019)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

40723/2018

Judge

H.J Fabricius

The High Court dismissed an urgent application to rescind a final liquidation order, finding no procedural error, inadequate notice issues, and no basis under Rule 42 or section 354.

• Rescission Of Judgment
• Winding Up Orders
• Notice To Creditors
• Rule 42 Uniform Rules
• Section 354 Companies Act
• Rescission-of-judgment

Absa Bank Limited v Thermex Carbon Technologies (2013/25849)

Absa Bank Limited v Thermex Carbon Technologies (2013/25849) [2015] ZAGPJHC 294 (10 December 2015)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2013/25849

Judge

Kathree-Setiloane

The court found that while ABSA failed to comply with section 346(4A)(b) of the Companies Act by not filing the required affidavit and did not notify the City of Johannesburg as a known creditor, these were technical defences. Thermex did not demonstrate a bona fide defence to the liquidation application, as it failed to pay the full arrears before the hearing and did not show it was able to pay its debts. The alleged agreement between ABSA and Thermex was conditional on full payment, which was not met. The court held that technical non-compliance does not warrant rescission of the provisiona…

Source excerpt

• Winding Up Orders
• Rescission Of Judgment
• Section 346 4a Companies Act
• Technical Defences
• Locus Standi
• Compliance With Court Orders

Jameya Investment Projects CC v Magistrate Naidoo and Others (467/2015)

Jameya Investment Projects CC v Magistrate Naidoo and Others (467/2015) [2015] ZAGPJHC 21 (10 February 2015)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

467/2015

Judge

FHD Van Oosten

The High Court held that launching a rescission application under rule 49(11) automatically suspended liquidation proceedings, and granted a stay pending rescission.

• Urgent Applications
• Winding Up Orders
• Rescission Of Judgment
• Rule 49 11
• Liquidation Proceedings
• Rule-49-11

Ward and Another v Suit and Others In Re: Gurr v Zambia Airways Corporation Ltd. (51/96)

Ward and Another v Suit and Others In Re: Gurr v Zambia Airways Corporation Ltd. (51/96) [1998] ZASCA 16; [1998] 2 All SA 479 (A) (23 March 1998)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

51/96

Judges

Mahomed, Eksteen, Scott, Zulman, Stretcher

The court held that South African courts may wind up an external company even if it is already in liquidation abroad, and dismissed the appeal.

• External Company Liquidation
• Recognition Of Foreign Liquidators
• Concursus Creditorum
• Winding Up Orders
• Jurisdiction Of Sa Courts
• External-company-liquidation