This judgment has been anonymised to protect personal information in compliance with the law.
Loading PDF...
This document is 847.5 KB. Do you want to load it?
Cited documents 5
Act
3|
Citizenship and Immigration
·
Education
·
Environment, Climate and Wildlife
·
Health and Food Safety
·
Human Rights
·
International Law
·
Labour and Employment
·
Public administration
|
|
Human Rights
·
Peace and Security
|
Judgment
2|
Applicant failed to prove entitlement to interim interdict restraining respondents from alleging fronting or representing themselves as shareholders.
* Interim interdict – requirements: prima facie right, well‑grounded apprehension of irreparable harm, balance of convenience, no satisfactory alternative remedy. * Shareholder/director status – disputed removals and procedural compliance affect interim relief. * Defamation/communications – entitlement to complain to regulatory bodies; no automatic interdiction of such complaints absent clear threat of irreparable harm. * Evidentiary sufficiency – hearsay and lack of confirmatory affidavits undermine urgent relief.
|
|
Appeal dismissed: creditors’ ratification and lack of challenge rendered declaratory order moot; costs awarded against the appellants.
Superior Courts Act s 18 — execution pending appeal — declaratory orders; Mootness — effect of creditors’ resolutions at second meeting; Insolvency law — notice requirements (Gazette/newspaper/registered post) and attendance obligations of insolvent; Creditors’ control — creditors’ resolutions binding and extend liquidators’ powers; Exceptional circumstances — dissipation of assets and irreparable harm; Costs — party-and-party costs, two counsel, and wasted costs on attorney-and-client scale.
|