|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| June 2021 |
|
|
Application to terminate business rescue and liquidate company dismissed for lack of locus standi, proof of insolvency, and defective service.
Companies Act — business rescue — practitioner’s locus standi and proof of appointment; requirement to investigate and prove no reasonable prospect of rescue (s141); publication of business rescue plan and statutory meetings (ss147–151,150(5)); notice and service requirements to affected persons (s141(2)(a)); procedural and disclosure obligations in effectively ex parte applications; unreasonable delay in business rescue as ground for termination.
|
30 June 2021 |
|
Court upheld convictions: eyewitness identifications reliable; no manufactured ID and no basis to disturb trial court findings.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – reliability assessed by lighting, proximity, opportunity, prior knowledge, identification parade and suggestibility. Criminal procedure – Identity parades – weight and fairness; absence of evidence of manufactured identification. Appeal – Interference with trial court’s factual findings – limited where no demonstrable material misdirection. Evidence – Minor contradictions do not necessarily vitiate identification where overall reliability established.
|
30 June 2021 |
|
Discretionary trustee payments and lack of evidence of imperilling conduct defeat attempt to remove co‑trustees and compel higher maintenance.
Trusts – testamentary trust – trustees’ discretion to pay maintenance; beneficiaries’ rights contingent; beneficiaries both income and capital beneficiaries; removal of trustee – test for removal under s 20(1) Trust Property Control Act – conduct must imperil trust/property or its proper administration; conflict of interest/professional relationship not per se disqualifying; procedural requirements and joinder of trustees; motion proceedings – Plascon-Evans approach.
|
30 June 2021 |
|
Leave to appeal refused where appeal was time‑barred under CSOS Act and no proper condonation was pleaded.
Civil procedure – leave to appeal under s 17(1)(a) Superior Courts Act – higher threshold: appeal must 'would' have reasonable prospects of success or compelling reasons exist. Administrative law – Community Schemes Ombud Service Act s 57(2) – 30‑day appeal period measured in calendar days. Condonation – must be properly pleaded (founding affidavit or separate application); cannot be raised impermissibly for the first time in reply; informal ‘bar’ condonation distinguishable where respondents had notice. Costs – punitive costs refused where not justified.
|
28 June 2021 |
|
|
25 June 2021 |
|
|
25 June 2021 |
|
Court interdicted former employees and their company for breaching fiduciary duties and engaging in unlawful competition.
Company law – fiduciary duties – CEO abusing position to set up competing business; passing off; misappropriation of trade secrets; unlawful interference with contracts Evidence – section 35(5) Constitution (self‑incrimination) applies to criminal trials; civil court may admit flash‑drive evidence where no criminal use shown Interim relief – interlocutory/permanent interdict to restrain unlawful competition and compel return of company material Costs – party‑and‑party costs awarded; punitive costs refused
|
25 June 2021 |
|
A valid nulla bona return established s8(b) insolvency and provisional sequestration was granted as likely advantageous to creditors.
Insolvency Act s8(b) – nulla bona return – onus to prove act of insolvency; caveat subscriptor – signature binds absent fraud; advantage to creditors – low threshold, reasonable prospect suffices; condonation for late affidavit – reasonable steps and no prejudice; requirement to disclose marital status under s9(3)(a)(ii).
|
24 June 2021 |
|
Death alone does not automatically allow cancellation of an instalment sale or immediate repossession of the vehicle.
Instalment-sale agreements; whether death constitutes breach or event permitting cancellation; requirement to follow contractual/notice remedies before repossession; necessity of alleging personal knowledge in affidavits; joinder of executor/estate and proper service; inadmissibility/irrelevance of legal-advice assertions in affidavits.
|
24 June 2021 |
|
|
23 June 2021 |
|
|
21 June 2021 |
|
Whether a purported community meeting validly elected directors and whether an interim board must be appointed pending proper elections.
Company law – internal governance – validity of members’ meeting and director elections; administrative findings by regulatory body (ICASA CCC) – implementation of remedial directions; interim relief – appointment of interim directors to preserve company affairs pending proper election; equitable relief – interdicts restraining persons from representing themselves as directors and interfering with company operations.
|
21 June 2021 |
|
Accused convicted of murder (dolus eventualis), some attempted murders, and unlawful firearm possession; defences of necessity rejected.
Criminal law – Murder – dolus eventualis established where accused foresees death as real possibility and reconciles himself thereto; Use and possession of firearm – no justification where no imminent unlawful attack; Ballistics and post‑mortem evidence – live shotgun pellets and wad indicate short‑range live ammunition; Credibility – eyewitness corroboration can outweigh accused’s account; Attempted murder – convictions only where foreseeability and reconciliation established.
|
17 June 2021 |
|
Condonation granted for a long-delayed replying affidavit where delay was inordinate but not wilful and no irremediable prejudice shown.
Civil procedure – Condonation for late filing of replying affidavit – Uniform Rule 27(1) and Rule 6(5)(e) – explanation of delay, relevance of reply, prejudice and interests of justice – new matter in reply must be particularised – inspection in loco and amended notice of motion relevant to assessment.
|
11 June 2021 |
|
Eviction under PIE confirmed: COVID-19 and necessity defences insufficient; occupiers given 30 days to vacate, enforcement authorized.
PIE Act s4 — procedural compliance and substantive enquiry; eviction versus section 26 right to housing; necessity/COVID-19 defence; non-joinder of organs of state; just and equitable eviction dates.
|
9 June 2021 |
|
An eviction under PIE is just and equitable where occupiers unlawfully occupy land and no immediate TEA is available.
Property law/PIE Act – Eviction under s 4(7) – balancing interests and ‘just and equitable’ inquiry – availability of alternative or temporary accommodation (TEA). Constitutional duty of municipality – assessment and provision of TEA; consequences where TEA unavailable. Lawful occupation – occupation and erection of structures without consent renders occupiers unlawful despite social or housing-policy grievances. Admissibility – defective or unsigned affidavits may be admitted in the interests of justice where substantive issues can be ventilated. Relief – court may refuse prolonged suspension to enable State to provide TEA and may grant a limited vacatur period with sheriff enforcement.
|
8 June 2021 |
|
A court eviction order remains binding pending review; re‑entry after eviction constitutes contempt, warranting suspended imprisonment and committal.
Civil procedure – urgency – compliance with practice directives and court directions; failure to comply may justify removal from roll. Contempt of court – elements: existence and knowledge of order; wilful, mala fide non‑compliance. Principle – court orders remain binding until set aside; pending reconsideration does not suspend operation of order. Sanctions – suspended custodial sentence and committal authorised for breach of order.
|
7 June 2021 |