RESERVED JUDGMENT Delivered on: 28 March 2008
|
|
- Brianne Page
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NATAL PROVINCIAL DIVISION 1659/07 MEHMOOD SADER APPLICANT versus WARDA BUTCHERY CC T/A RS BUTCHERY RESPONDENT RESERVED JUDGMENT Delivered on: 28 March 2008 NTSHANGASE, J [1] This is an application for the liquidation of the respondent, a close corporation in terms of section 68(d) of the Close Corporations Act No. 69 of 1984 [ the Act ] on the ground that a deadlock between members of the respondent makes it just and equitable that the respondent be wound up. In opposition to the application it is contended that there are no grounds for liquidating the respondent in terms of section 68(d) of the Act. Certain points in limine taken on behalf of the respondent in respect of non joinder of the members of respondent, lack of notice to creditors and urgency yielded to argument advanced by Mr Snyman on behalf of the applicant. [2] The sole members of the respondent are applicant, his brother Imran Abdool Kader Sader [ Imran ] and their mother. The applicant and his brother Imran each have a 33% members interest in the respondent, and their mother s is 34%. This position has prevailed from 17 August
2 when applicant s and Imran s father died. [3] The respondent operates a butchery business. Applicant s and Imran s father had operated that business in sole ownership for some time until the end of 1992 when the respondent was founded and assumed its ownership. After the death of their father applicant and Imran engaged in specific operations in the conduct of the business. Their wives, Shanaaz and Sarah were also engaged as employees of the respondent. [4] It is common cause that there presently exists a deadlock between applicant and Imran. There may have been an undercurrent of discord based on applicant s averred earlier perception that Imran and his wife Sarah had become greedy and wanted the whole business for themselves and made it clear that applicant and his wife were not welcome in the business. Although such discord may have simmered within the applicant it did not ignite. What was to culminate in the present deadlock in the relationship between applicant and Imran started in 2003 when applicant entered into a clandestine love relationship with another woman who, some time later, became his second wife in terms of Islamic laws. It is common cause that Imran s wife, Sarah discovered the clandestine relationship and confronted the applicant about it and insisted on disclosing its existence to Shanaaz for the reason given by Imran to be that it obviously affected the relationship between applicant and Shanaaz in the business. How it affected the relationship when Shanaaz at that stage did not even know about it was not stated. As it appears that Shanaaz was not yet aware of the relationship, the purpose of her intended disclosure thereof to Shanaaz is difficult to understand. It is equally difficult to understand how it would help to eliminate the clandestine relationship s adverse effect, if any at all, in 2
3 the conduct of the business. I find no acceptable reason for what applicant aptly describes as her nosiness in his personal affairs. [5] Applicant states that Imran and Sarah kept on arguing, interfering and fighting with (him) and it later became unbearable in the shop. He also states that because of the tension in the butchery he eventually left the business at the end of March The applicant again does not provide detail as to what applicant and Sarah argued about; nor does he provide detail of the nature of interference and the fights with him. Whether such fighting took the form of physical evidence or some other form is not disclosed. The detail about his arguments, interference and fighting with him should have been disclosed for assessment of the reasonableness or otherwise of his reaction thereto. Sarah s prying into his clandestine relationship, vexatious through it could have been, cannot properly be regarded as reasonable cause for applicant s decision to leave respondent s business; nor can any turbulence in applicant s relationship with his wife which may have resulted from the later revelation of the clandestine relationship be regarded as reasonable cause for doing so. It clearly lends force to Imran s contention that the applicant forsook his fiduciary duties with respondent as a result of a displacement of focus and interest in order to nurture his new found love. Therein lies the cause of the deadlock. When the applicant, without just cause, forsook his fiduciary duties as a member of the respondent he acted in violation of the following provisions of section 42(2) of the Act: Without prejudice to the generality of the expression fiduciary relationship, the provisions of subsection (1) imply that a member a) shall in relation to the corporation act honestly and in good faith, and in particular 3
4 i) shall exercise such powers as he or she may have to ii) manage or represent the corporation in the interest and for the benefit of the corporation; and shall not act without or exceed the powers aforesaid [6] The applicant sates that he thought he would just take some time and sort out his personal and domestic problems before returning to the business. In regard to his absence Imran states that what the applicant does not inform the court about is that from October 2004 to October 2005 he was employed by their other brother Ebrahim Abdool Kader Sader at KwaManzini Butchery, which, according to Imran, confirmed his loss of interest in working in the business of the respondent. In reply, applicant states that the reason for working at KwaManzini Butchery was that Imran made it impossible for (him) to go back to the respondent. I shall deal with this specific response later. [7] Applicant charges Imran and his wife with excluding him from running the business, contrary to the following provisions of section 46(a) and (b) of the Act: Every member shall be entitled to participate in the carrying on of the business of the corporation; b) subject to the provisions of section 47, members shall have equal rights in regard to the management of the business of the corporation and in regard to the power to represent the corporation in the carrying on of its business [8] It is correct that when the applicant returned to the business Imran by his 4
5 own admission took steps to prevent applicant s resumption of participation in the carrying on of the business. When Imran did so, he simply acted in terms of an acceptance of applicant s repudiation of the understanding between members that applicant, as is expected of respondent s members, would participate in the running of the business. He had abandoned the business for approximately 2½ years. The potential casualty to that abandonment was the business. Acting as he did in terms of the acceptance of applicant s repudiation, Imran s conduct was, in my view, not wrongful. [9] I now revert to his response in regard to his employment at KwaManzini Butchery in 2004 to The applicant is being untruthful when, in reply to Imran s averment that he worked from 2004 to 2005 at KwaManzini Butchery he states that Imran made it impossible for (him) to go back to the respondent as, in that period, applicant had neither shown a desire to return to the business nor attempted to return to the business until Referring to the impasse and the destruction of trust between them the applicant states: This occurred at the time when I left the business in 2004 and gained momentum again when I attempted to get back into the business in (my emphasis) Applicant states that he decided to go back to the business in February 2006 after Imran had told Shanaaz that he (Imran) could no longer provide for her and applicant s four children and that she had to leave the business. In that regard the applicant, in his founding affidavit further states: I cannot support her and the four children because I am also without 5
6 an income, and therefore I decided to go back to the business to work and to earn an income, with which I could support Shanaaz and our four children. (my emphasis). That decision was in From the foregoing it is quite clear that the applicant, contrary to his contention, excluded himself from participating in the carrying on of the business of the respondent. In that regard applicant was clearly wrongfully responsible for the resultant deadlock. This is one reason why the applicant s application must fail for, as stated by Leon J in Emphy and Another v Pacer Properties (Pty) Ltd 1979(3) SA 363(D) at 368H: an applicant who relies upon the first and equitable provision must not have been wrongfully responsible for the situation which has arisen. [10] In regard to the question of entitlement to a winding up order under the just and equitable provision by reason of the existence of a deadlock, I am in respectful agreement with the following dictum from the judgment of Leon J in Emphy and Another supra at 369A: I am satisfied that the mere existence of a deadlock does not per se entitle an applicant to a winding up order under the just and equitable provision. What requires to be emphasised is that the court is concerned with what is just and equitable and not with whether there is a deadlock or not. The existence of a deadlock is one example of what might be regarded in a proper case as just and equitable but a court must always have regard to all the circumstances of the case. (my emphasis) 6
7 [11] This brings me to the second reason why the application must fail. The following are some of the factors worthy of consideration: i) The desire to wind up the respondent is applicant s alone to suit his circumstances. There is no mistrust, tension or deadlock between Imran and their mother who, together hold a 67% members interest in the respondent. Such an order as is sought would unfairly prejudice Imran and their aged mother by nullifying the financial benefit that their mother derives from her member s interest as well as that which Imran, his wife and children derive from the operation of the business. The employee breadwinners families and their dependants would suffer a similar fate; ii) It appears that the business has, for a considerable time, been conducted soundly and in solvent circumstances with a benefit of a pricing structure which makes it accessible even to the disadvantaged sector of the community. That too will be lost. [12] Another reason why the application must fail is that if the applicant has just cause for complaint he is not without a remedy alternative to a winding up order. The provisions of s36 and s49 of the Act are available to him. They read as follows: 36(1) On application by any member of a corporation a Court may on any of the following grounds order that any member shall cease to be a member of the corporation: (a) subject to the provisions of the association agreement (if any), that the member is permanently incapable, because of unsound mind or any other reason, of 7
8 performing his part in the carrying on of the business (b) of the corporation; that the member has been guilty of such conduct as, taking into account the nature of the corporation s business, is likely to have a prejudicial effect on the carrying on of the business; (c) that the member so conducts himself in matters relating to the corporation s business that it is not reasonably practicable for the other member or members to carry on the business of the corporation with him; or (d) that circumstances have arisen which render it just and equitable that such member should cease to be a member of the corporation; Provided that such application to a Court on any ground mentioned in paragraph (a) or (d) may also be made by a member in respect of whom the order shall apply. (2) A Court granting an order in terms of subsection (1) may make such further orders as it deems fit in regard to a) the acquisition of the member s interest concerned by the corporation or by members other than the member concerned; or b) the amounts (if any) to be paid in respect of the 8
9 member s interest concerned or the claims against the corporation of that member, the manner and times of such payments and the persons to whom they shall be made; or c) any other matter regarding the cessation of membership which the Court deems fit. 49(1) Any member of a corporation who alleges that any particular act or omission of the corporation or of one or more other members is unfairly prejudicial, unjust or inequitable to him, or to some members including him, or that the affairs of the corporation are being conducted in a manner unfairly prejudicial, unjust or inequitable to him, or to some members including him, may make an application to a Court for any order under this section. (2) If on any such application it appears to the Court that the particular act or omission is unfairly prejudicial, unjust or inequitable as contemplated in subsection (1), or that the corporation s affairs are being conducted as so contemplated, and if the Court considers it just and equitable, the Court may with a view to settling the dispute make such order as it thinks fit, whether for regulating the future conduct of the affairs of the corporation or for the purchase of the interest of any member of the corporation by other members thereof or by the corporation. [13] In the result I make the following order: 9
10 The application is dismissed with costs. 10
11 Date of Hearing: 3 March 2008 Date of Judgment: 28 March 2008 Counsel for the applicant: Instructed by: Adv CJ Snyman Steenkamp Weakley Ngwane Counsel for the first respondent: Instructed by: Adv AE Potgieter Bayat Sader and Partners c/o Ayoob Attorneys 11
Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act, 8 of and. Sectional Titles Schemes Management Regulations, 2016
Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act, 8 of 2011 and Sectional Titles Schemes Management Regulations, 2016 This Act and the associated Regulations have been reproduced by ANGOR Property Specialists (Pty)
More informationELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENT TO CHAPTER 15
C H A P T E R 15 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENT TO CHAPTER 15 UNIFORM PARTNERSHIP ACT (1914) Part I PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS 1. Name of Act This act may be cited as Uniform Partnership Act. 2. Definition of Terms
More informationCASE NO: 2369/2013 DATE HEARD: 24/10/2013 DATE DELIVERED: 7/11/13 REPORTABLE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN) CASE NO: 2369/2013 DATE HEARD: 24/10/2013 DATE DELIVERED: 7/11/13 REPORTABLE In the matter between: ESTHER NOMVUYO FENI APPLICANT
More informationNC General Statutes - Chapter 59 Article 2 1
Article 2. Uniform Partnership Act. Part 1. Preliminary Provisions. 59-31. North Carolina Uniform Partnership Act. Articles 2 through 4A, inclusive, of this Chapter shall be known and may be cited as the
More informationCLOSE CORPORATIONS ACT NO. 69 OF 1984
CLOSE CORPORATIONS ACT NO. 69 OF 1984 [View Regulation] [ASSENTED TO 19 JUNE, 1984] [DATE OF COMMENCEMENT: 1 JANUARY, 1985] (English text signed by the State President) This Act has been updated to Government
More informationSectional Title Schemes Management Act No 8 of 2011
Sectional Title Schemes Management Act No 8 of 2011 (Assented to 11 June 2011) (Date of commencement 7 October 2016) ACT To provide for the establishment of bodies corporate to manage and regulate sections
More informationBELIZE LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ACT CHAPTER 258 REVISED EDITION 2011 SHOWING THE SUBSTANTIVE LAWS AS AT 31 ST DECEMBER, 2011
BELIZE LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ACT CHAPTER 258 REVISED EDITION 2011 SHOWING THE SUBSTANTIVE LAWS AS AT 31 ST DECEMBER, 2011 This is a revised edition of the Substantive Laws, prepared by the Law
More informationEASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT: MTHATHA CASE NO: 2743/11 SAKHELE PRECIOUS NKUME. FIRST NATONAL BANK Respondent JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT: MTHATHA CASE NO: 2743/11 Heard on: 06/03/12 Delivered on: 15/03/12 In the matter between: SAKHELE PRECIOUS NKUME Applicant and FIRSTRAND BANK
More informationSINGAPORE COMPANIES ACT (Cap. 50) PART VIII RECEIVERS AND MANAGERS
SINGAPORE COMPANIES ACT (Cap. 50) PART VIII RECEIVERS AND MANAGERS Disqualification for appointment as receiver 217. (1) The following shall not be qualified to be appointed and shall not act as receiver
More informationNo. 2 of Banks and Financial Institutions Act 2000.
No. 2 of 2000. Banks and Financial Institutions Act 2000. Certified on: 7 June 2000 INDEPENDENT STATE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA. No. 1 of 2001. Banks and Financial Institutions Act 2000. ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS.
More informationCLOSE CORPORATIONS ACT NO. 69 OF 1984
CLOSE CORPORATIONS ACT NO. 69 OF 1984 [View Regulation] [ASSENTED TO 19 JUNE, 1984] [DATE OF COMMENCEMENT: 1 JANUARY, 1985] (English text signed by the State President) This Act has been updated to Government
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN STANDARD BANK OF SOUTH AFRICA LIMITED
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN In the matter between: Case No.: 3048/2015 STANDARD BANK OF SOUTH AFRICA LIMITED Plaintiff And JOROY 0004 CC t/a UBUNTU PROCUREM 1 st
More informationSEYCHELLES LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS ACT, (as amended, 2011) ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS. Part I - Preliminary
1. Short title and commencement 2. Interpretation 3. Application of the Commercial Code Act SEYCHELLES LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS ACT, 2003 (as amended, 2011) ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS Part I - Preliminary Part
More informationFREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA In the case between:- Case No. : 5495/2011 KRUGER HERMAN UTOPIA CONSTRUCTION CC Reg no 2002/001529/23 First Applicant Second Applicant en SET-MAK
More informationSOLUTION BUSINESS AND CORPORATE LAW NOV 2012
SOLUTION 1 A. The Lower Courts include: B. i. The circuit courts ii. The magistrate courts; and iii. The National House of Chiefs, Regional houses of chiefs and every traditional council in respect of
More informationLAWS OF BRUNEI CHAPTER 190 MARRIED WOMEN
CHAPTER 190 MARRIED WOMEN S 30/90 REVISED EDITION 2000 (30th December 2000) 2000 Ed. CAP. 190 1 LAWS OF BRUNEI REVISED EDITION 2000 CHAPTER 190 MARRIED WOMEN ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS Section PART I PRELIMINARY
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) Case No: 20123/2017 20124/2017 In the matter between: SANRIA 21 (PTY) LTD Applicant and NORDALINE (PTY) LTD Respondent (Case no. 20123/2017)
More informationChapter 3 Miscellaneous 735. Disclosure of information by Revenue Commissioners to Registrar] MKD/096/AC#
[PART 12 STRIKE OFF AND RESTORATION Chapter 1 Strike Off of company 715. When Registrar may strike company off register. 716. Grounds for involuntary strike off 717. Registrar s notice to company of intention
More informationKey features of a Guernsey LLP A NEW GUERNSEY VEHICLE: LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIPS. Not a general partnership or limited partnership
A NEW GUERNSEY VEHICLE: LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIPS By Matt Sanders (Group Partner) and Kim Paiva (Senior Associate) Introduction Guernsey has joined Jersey, the UK and a number of other jurisdictions
More informationFORM A FILING SHEET FOR EASTERN CAPE JUDGMENT TECHNOFIN LEASING & FINANCE (PTY) LTD
1 FORM A FILING SHEET FOR EASTERN CAPE JUDGMENT ECJ NO: 021/2005 TECHNOFIN LEASING & FINANCE (PTY) LTD Plaintiff and FRAMESBY HIGH SCHOOL THE MEMBER FOR THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL FOR EDUCATION, EASTERN CAPE
More informationLIMITED PARTNERSHIP ACT
ANGUILLA INTERIM REVISED STATUTES OF ANGUILLA 2000 CHAPTER 7 LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ACT Showing the Law as at 16 October 2000 Published by Authority Printed in The Attorney General s Chambers ANGUILLA Government
More informationHARARE HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE MAKONI J HARARE, 6 July 2017 & 28 February Opposed Matter
1 PROFESSOR PATSON ZVANDASARA versus DR GODFREY SAUNGWEME DR MADEINE MAKONESE BELVEDERE NURSING HOME (PVT) LTD FINPOWER INVESTMENTS (PVT) LTD MAINBRAIN TRADING (PVT) LTD REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES N.O HARARE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, FREE ST ATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN HEARD ON: 2 FEBRUARY 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, FREE ST ATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN Reportable: YES/NO Of Interest to other Judges: YES/NO Circulate to Magistrates: YES/NO In the matter between: Case No.: 51092016 FIDELITY
More informationTHE LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP BILL, 2008
Bill No. XLVI of 2008 THE LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP BILL, 2008 ARRANGEMENT OF CLAUSES CHAPTER I PRELIMINARY TO BE INTRODUCED IN THE RAJYA SABHA CLAUSES 1. Short title, extent and commencement. 2. Definitions.
More informationIN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG Not Reportable Case no: J 1512/17 In the matter between: SANDI MAJAVU Applicant and LESEDI LOCAL MUNICIPALITY ISAAC RAMPEDI N.O SPEAKER OF LESEDI LOCAL
More informationGAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NO: 28070/2015 ( 1) REPORT ABLE: YES (2) OF INTEREST TO OT (3) REVISED. ~J.0.Jrq l?.. DATE SIGNATURE In the matter between: JILLIAN
More informationGUYANA TRADE UNIONS ACT. Arrangement of sections
GUYANA TRADE UNIONS ACT Arrangement of sections 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation. 3. Trade unions. 4. Exemptions. 5. When objects of union not unlawful. 6. When trade union contracts not enforceable.
More informationCASE NO: 48387/11 NORMAN KLEIN N.O. OSMAN MOOSA N.O. REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT JOHANNESBURG. In the matter between:
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT JOHANNESBURG CASE NO: 48387/11 (1) R E P O R T A B L E :^ / NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: > ^ / N O (3) >REVISED..s.bboj.s... DATE SIGNATURE In the
More informationTHE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA CASE NO: 41288/2014 DATE OF HEARING: 14 MAY 2015 (1) REPORTABLE: YES / NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO (3) REVISED... DATE... SIGNATURE
More informationCOMPANIES BILL Unofficial version. As amended in Committee Report Stage (Seanad) on 17 th June30 th September 2014
COMPANIES BILL 2012 Unofficial version As amended in Committee Report Stage (Seanad) on 17 th June30 th September 2014 v1.17/06/30/092014 Disclaimer: Whilst every care has been taken in reflecting the
More informationPART 5 DUTIES OF DIRECTORS AND OTHER OFFICERS CHAPTER 1 Preliminary and definitions 219. Interpretation and application (Part 5) 220.
PART 5 DUTIES OF DIRECTORS AND OTHER OFFICERS CHAPTER 1 Preliminary and definitions 219. Interpretation and application (Part 5) 220. Connected persons 221. Shadow directors 222. De facto director CHAPTER
More informationMAY 2012 BUSINESS AND CORPORATE LAW SOLUTION
SOLUTION 1 A court decision that is called as an example or analogy to resolve similar questions of law in later cases. The doctrine of decisis et not quieta movere. Stand by past decisions and do not
More informationLIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIPS (DISSOLUTION AND WINDING UP) (JERSEY) REGULATIONS 2018
Limited Liability Partnerships (Dissolution and Winding Up) Arrangement LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIPS (DISSOLUTION AND WINDING UP) (JERSEY) REGULATIONS 2018 Arrangement Regulation PART 1 3 INTRODUCTION
More informationPage 1 of 26 Document 1 of 1 CLOSE CORPORATIONS ACT 26 OF 1988 [ASSENTED TO: DETAILS NOT KNOWN] [DATE OF COMMENCEMENT: 25 JULY 1994] (Signed by the President) as amended by Close Corporation Amendment
More informationANALYSIS. BE IT ENACTED by the General Assembly of New Zealand in Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:
1965, No. 137 News Media Ownership 1117 ANALYSIS Title 1. Short Title 2. Interpretation 3. Restrictions on operation of private broadcasting station or publication of newspaper 4. Membership of news company,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTHERN CAPE DIVISION, KIMBERLEY)
1 SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy Reportable: Circulate to Judges: Circulate to
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, PRETORIA) JUDGEMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, PRETORIA) CASE NO: 57639/2007 INYANGA TRADING 444 (PTY) LTD APPLICANT And R&T ONTWIKKELAARS (PTY) LTD RESPONDENT JUDGEMENT MAVUNDLA J:. [1]
More informationBANDILE KASHE, in his capacity as the Executor for the Estate Late W.M. M., Reference No: 2114/2007 JUDGMENT
1 SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EAST LONDON
More informationThe Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008
(c) Copyright 2009, vlex. Copyright 2007, vlex. All Rights Reserved. Copy for personal use only. Distribution or reproduction is not allowed. The Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008 7/01/2009, Chapter
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA KWAZULU-NATAL DIVISION, DURBAN. t/a FNB INSURANCE BROKERS JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA KWAZULU-NATAL DIVISION, DURBAN In the matter between: FIRSTRAND BANK LIMITED CASE NO. 14495/14 t/a FNB INSURANCE BROKERS Applicant and ANILCHUND PRITHIPAL WESTWOOD INSURANCE
More informationSEPARATE LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS (JERSEY) LAW 2011
SEPARATE LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS (JERSEY) LAW 2011 Revised Edition Showing the law as at 1 January 2017 This is a revised edition of the law Separate Limited Partnerships (Jersey) Law 2011 Arrangement SEPARATE
More informationJUDGMENT DELIVERED 08 SEPTEMBER 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) Reportable Case no. 6802/2013 In the matter between: JOHAN DURR Excipient /Plaintiff and LE NOE NEELS BARNARDT CHARLES DICKINSON First
More informationFREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA ENGEN PETROLEUM LIMITED
FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between: Case No: 1771/2012 ENGEN PETROLEUM LIMITED Applicant and MR ROBERT HOWARD VAN LOGGERENBERG NO MRS PETRONELLA FRANCINA
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN) REPORTABLE Case Number: 7344/2013 In the matter between: Dirk Johannes Van der Merwe Applicant And Duraline (Proprietary) Limited
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA KWAZULU-NATAL LOCAL DIVISION, DURBAN. EUGENE NEL N.O. First Plaintiff. JUSTI STROH N.O. Third Plaintiff O R D E R
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA KWAZULU-NATAL LOCAL DIVISION, DURBAN In the matter between: CASE NO: 11602/14 EUGENE NEL N.O. First Plaintiff KURT ROBERT KNOOP N.O. Second Plaintiff JUSTI STROH N.O.
More informationJUDGMENT. [2] On 11 August 2005, a rule nisi was granted in the following terms on an unopposed basis:
00IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD AT JOHANNESBURG CASE NO: J 1507/05 In the matter between: MAKHADO MUNICIPALITY Applicant and SOUTH AFRICAN MUNICIPAL WORKERS UNION (SAMWU) AS RABAKALI and 669
More informationGOVERNMENT GAZETTE REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA
GOVERNMENT GAZETTE OF THE REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA N$5,64 WINDHOEK - 6 December 1994 No. 992 CONTENTS Page GOVERNMENT NOTICE No. 235 Promulgation of Social Security Act, 1994 (Act 34 of 1994), of the Parliament.
More informationpreparing AGM documents, including the financial and operational reports for the previous year and plans for the following year;
The body corporate Every scheme has a body corporate. This is an association not a company or partnership with the ability to contract, to sue and be sued and all the owners of units are members. It exists
More informationNew Reclamation Group (Pty) Ltd. JUDGMENT Delivered on: 16 November [1] This is an application lodged by first and second respondent
IN THE KWAZULU-NATAL HIGH COURT, DURBAN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between Case No: 2602/11 New Reclamation Group (Pty) Ltd Applicant and Chicks Scrap Metal (Pty) Ltd Robert Jacques Thomas
More informationChapter 3. Powers and duties of Receivers
Chapter 3 Powers and duties of Receivers 42938. Powers of receiver. 4309. Power of receiver and certain others to apply to court for directions and receiver s liability on contracts. 43140. Duty of receiver
More information(EASTERN CAPE PORT ELIZABETH) CASE NO.: 812/2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE PORT ELIZABETH) CASE NO.: 812/2012 In the matter between: CLIMAX CONCRETE PRODUCTS CC t/a CLIMAX CONCRETE PRODUCTS CC Registration Number CK 1985/014313/23
More informationUNFAIR DISMISSALS ACT, 1977
UNFAIR DISMISSALS ACT, 1977 AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR REDRESS FOR EMPLOYEES UNFAIRLY DISMISSED FROM THEIR EMPLOYMENT, TO PROVIDE FOR THE DETERMINATION OF CLAIMS FOR SUCH REDRESS BY RIGHTS COMMISSIONERS AND
More informationBERMUDA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AMENDMENT ACT : 20
QUO FA T A F U E R N T BERMUDA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AMENDMENT ACT 2015 2015 : 20 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Citation Amends section 1A Amends section 5 Amends section 8 Amends section 8B Amends
More informationIN THE KWAZULU-NATAL HIGH COURT, PIETERMARITZBURG REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA CASE NO. 6404/11 In the matter between:
IN THE KWAZULU-NATAL HIGH COURT, PIETERMARITZBURG REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA CASE NO. 6404/11 In the matter between: SOLOMON MNGOMEZULU 1 ST APPLICANT TINDLA ORELIUS MNGOMEZULU 2 ND APPLICANT JABULANI SEVENDAYS
More informationClose Corporations Act 26 of 1988 (OG 5658) brought into force after Namibian independence on 1 March 1994 by Proc.
(OG 5658) brought into force after Namibian independence on 1 March 1994 by Proc. 9/1994 (GG 820) as amended by Close Corporations Amendment Act 8 of 1994 (GG 891) deemed to have come into force on 1 March
More informationINDUSTRIAL AND PROVIDENT SOCIETIES (AMENDMENT) ACT 1978 INDUSTRIAL AND PROVIDENT SOCIETIES (AMENDMENT) ACT LONG TITLE
INDUSTRIAL AND PROVIDENT SOCIETIES (AMENDMENT) ACT 1978 INDUSTRIAL AND PROVIDENT SOCIETIES (AMENDMENT) ACT 1978 - LONG TITLE AN ACT TO AMEND THE INDUSTRIAL AND PROVIDENT SOCIETIES ACTS, 1893 TO 1971, AND
More informationREPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) CASE NO: 16572/2018 (1) REPORTABLE: NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO IN THE MATIER BETWEEN : SOLIDARITY APPLICANT
More informationIN THE LAND CLAIMS COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN THE LAND CLAIMS COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA Held in Durban on 21 August 2006 Before Ncube AJ CASE NUMBER: LCC71R-06 Decided on: 25 August 2006 In the matter between : UMOBA FARMS (PTY) LTD Applicant and GANTSHO
More informationLIMITED PARTNERSHIPS (JERSEY) LAW 1994
LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS (JERSEY) LAW 1994 Revised Edition Showing the law as at 1 January 2014 This is a revised edition of the law Limited Partnerships (Jersey) Law 1994 Arrangement LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS
More informationHIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. MABLE PHILLIP (Acting through her Attorney Nancy Mc Kenzie Greene) and CORRINE CLARA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GRENADA AND THE WEST INDIES ASSOCIATED STATES GRENADA CLAIM NO. GDAHCV 2013/0362 HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN: MABLE PHILLIP (Acting through her Attorney Nancy Mc Kenzie Greene)
More informationJUDGMENT: 8 NOVEMBER [1] This is an application by the Defendant to permit the joinder of Dr. Smith (the
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN) Case No: 21453/10 In the matter between: MICHAEL DAVID VAN DEN HEEVER In his representative capacity on behalf of Pierre van den Heever
More informationPROJET DE LOI. The Banking Supervision (Bailiwick of Guernsey) Law, 1994 * Consolidated text. States of Guernsey 1
PROJET DE LOI ENTITLED The Banking Supervision (Bailiwick of Guernsey) Law, 1994 * [CONSOLIDATED TEXT] NOTE This consolidated version of the enactment incorporates all amendments listed in the footnote
More informationConsolidated text PROJET DE LOI ENTITLED. The Employment Protection (Guernsey) Law, 1998 * [CONSOLIDATED TEXT] NOTE
PROJET DE LOI ENTITLED The Employment Protection (Guernsey) Law, 1998 * [CONSOLIDATED TEXT] NOTE This consolidated version of the enactment incorporates all amendments listed in the footnote below. However,
More informationIN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD AT JOHANNESBURG
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD AT JOHANNESBURG Reportable CASE NO: J20/2010 In the matter between: MOHLOPI PHILLEMON MAPULANE Applicant and MADIBENG LOCAL MUNICIPALITY First Respondent ADV VAN
More information(3;)c\~~,i.Ji_..,~ DATE ~ - ;... <'
CASE N0:768/2013 DELETE WHJCHEVER IS NOT APPLICABLE (1) REPORTABLE: vpo (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: y(ino (3;)c\~~,i.Ji_..,~ DATE ~ - ;....
More informationJUDGMENT DELIVERED ON 3 JUNE The applicant is the testamentary executor in the estate of the late
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE
More informationIN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER TRIBUNAL, HELD AT PRETORIA
national consumer tribunal IN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER TRIBUNAL, HELD AT PRETORIA Case No.: NCT/09/2008/57(1) (P) In the matter between SHOSHOLOZA FINANCE CC Applicant And NATIONAL CREDIT REGULATOR Respondent
More informationDELAWARE STATE SENATE 149th GENERAL ASSEMBLY SENATE BILL NO. 183
DELAWARE STATE SENATE 149th GENERAL ASSEMBLY SENATE BILL NO. 183 SPONSOR: Sen. Townsend & Sen. Henry & Rep. Mitchell & Rep. M. Smith Sens. Delcollo, Ennis, Hansen; Reps. Brady, J. Johnson, Lynn, Paradee,
More informationJ J LAZENBY t/a LAZENBY TRANSPORT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (FREE STATE PROVINCIAL DIVISION) Case No. : 1246/06 In the matter between:- J J LAZENBY t/a LAZENBY TRANSPORT Plaintiff versus M SAAYMAN N.O. Defendant CORAM: H.M. MUSI,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between Johann Mouton (Appellant) and Boland Bank Beperk (Respondent) BEFORE: SCHUTZ, SCOTT and ZULMAN JJA HEARD: 7 May 2001 DELIVERED: 10 May
More information[1] The above matter came before me on 11 April 2017 by way of urgency.
CASE NO: 20371/2017 (1) (2) (3) REPORT ABLE: YES / NO OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO REVISED. DATE SIGNATURE In the matter between: THE LAW SOCIETY OF THE NORTHERN PROVINCES Applicant and SIFELANE
More informationIN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD IN JOHANNESBURG
1 IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD IN JOHANNESBURG In the matter between: Case no: J812\07 NIREN INDARDAV SINGH Applicant and SA RAIL COMMUTER CORPORATION LTD t\a METRORAIL Respondent JUDGMENT
More information156 INDUSTRIAL CO-ORDINATION ACT
LAWS OF MALAYSIA REPRINT Act 156 INDUSTRIAL CO-ORDINATION ACT 1975 Incorporating all amendments up to 1 January 2006 PUBLISHED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF LAW REVISION, MALAYSIA UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE REVISION
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) MICHAEL ANDREW VAN AS JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON 26 AUGUST 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) In the matter between: CASE NO: 10589/16 MICHAEL ANDREW VAN AS Applicant And NEDBANK LIMITED Respondent JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON 26 AUGUST
More informationFREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA KRAMER WEIHMANN & JOUBERT INC
FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA In the application between:- KRAMER WEIHMANN & JOUBERT INC Application No: 3818/2011 Plaintiff and SOUTH AFRICAN COMERCIAL CATERING AND ALLIED
More informationn mad IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG DIVISION) JUDGMENT
DELETE WHICHEVER IS NOT APPLICABLE (1) REPORTABLB*B6/NO. (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO. (3) REVISED. \/~ n mad IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH GAUTENG DIVISION) In the matter between:
More informationRules of the High Court (Amendment) Rules 2008
Rules of the High Court (Amendment) Rules 2008 The Rules of the High Court (Cap. 4A) Order 102 THE COMPANIES ORDINANCE Remarks 1. Definitions (O. 102, r. 1) In this Order the Ordinance means the Companies
More informationOFFICE OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
1 OFFICE OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA KWAZULU-NATAL LOCAL DIVISION, DURBAN CASE NO: 3394/2014 In the matter between: AIR TREATMENT ENGINEERING AND MAINTENANCE
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT MARK WILLIAM LYNN NO FIRST APPELLANT TINTSWALO ANNAH NANA MAKHUBELE NO SECOND APPELLANT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case No: 687/10 In the matter between: MARK WILLIAM LYNN NO FIRST APPELLANT TINTSWALO ANNAH NANA MAKHUBELE NO SECOND APPELLANT and COLIN HENRY COREEJES
More informationNAFMII MASTER AGREEMENT (2009 VERSION)
For Reference Only NAFMII MASTER AGREEMENT (2009 VERSION) (English Translation) Copyright National Association of Financial Market Institutional Investors 2009 Statement on English Translation This English
More information[FUNCTIONING AS MPUMALANGA CIRCUIT COURT, MBOMBELA]
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, GAUTENG DIVISION,
More informationCHAPTER 18:01 SOCIETIES
CHAPTER 18:01 SOCIETIES ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS SECTION 1. Short title 2. Act not to apply to certain societies 3. Interpretation 4. Appointment of Registrar of Societies 5. Societies deemed to be established
More informationDirectors' Duties in Guernsey
Directors' Duties in Guernsey March 2018 1. OVERVIEW 1.1 This note provides a brief synopsis of the common law duties owed by directors of companies ("companies") incorporated in the Island of Guernsey
More informationPREVENTION OF FRAUD (INVESTMENTS) ACT
LAWS OF KENYA PREVENTION OF FRAUD (INVESTMENTS) ACT NO. 1 OF 1977 Revised Edition 2012 [1977] Published by the National Council for Law Reporting with the Authority of the Attorney-General www.kenyalaw.org
More informationA BILL. for. Enacted by the Parliament of the Bahamas. Short title. 1. This Act may be cited as the Anti-Terrorism Act, 2003.
A BILL for AN ACT TO IMPLEMENT THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION RESPECTING THE SUPPRESSION OF THE FINANCING OF TERRORISM, THE UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 1373 ON TERRORISM AND GENERALLY TO
More informationCivil Resolution Tribunal. Indexed as: Betuzzi v. The Owners, Strata Plan K350, 2017 CRTBC 6. Mark Betuzzi APPLICANT
Date Issued: February 15, 2017 File: ST-2016-00025 Civil Resolution Tribunal Indexed as: Betuzzi v. The Owners, Strata Plan K350, 2017 CRTBC 6 B E T W E E N : Mark Betuzzi APPLICANT A ND: The Owners, Strata
More informationTHIRD RESPONDENT S HEADS OF ARGUMENT: INTERVENING APPLICATION
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, PRETORIA In the matter between: CASE NO: 19577/09 DEMOCRATIC ALLIANCE Applicant and THE ACTING NATIONAL DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS First
More informationPART 21 EXTERNAL COMPANIES CHAPTER 1 Preliminary
PART 21 EXTERNAL COMPANIES CHAPTER 1 Preliminary 1300. Interpretation (Part 21) 1301. Application to external companies of certain provisions of Parts 1 to 14 CHAPTER 2 Filing obligations of external companies
More informationIN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD IN CAPE TOWN. BOLAND RUGBY (PTY) LTD Respondent
GUSH J IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD IN CAPE TOWN In the matter between: DEON H DAVIDS Reportable Case No: C12/10 Applicant and BOLAND RUGBY (PTY) LTD Respondent Date of Hearing : 3 August 2011
More informationChapter-21. Corporate Governance
Chapter-21 Corporate Governance BSNL, India For Internal Circulation Only 1 Meaning of Corporate Governance Corporate Governance refers to the manner, in which a Corporation is directed, and laws and customs
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NORTHERN CAPE HIGH COURT, KIMBERLEY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NORTHERN CAPE HIGH COURT, KIMBERLEY Case No: 580/11 Date of Hearing: 27.05.2011 Date Delivered: 17.06.2011 In the matter between: BABEREKI CONSULTING ENGINEERS (PTY) LIMITED
More informationTHE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG Reportable Case no: J 1499/17 LATOYA SAMANTHA SMITH CHRISTINAH MOKGADI MAHLANE First Applicant Second Applicant and OFFICE OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE MEMME SEJOSENGWE
More informationConflict of Interest Guidelines
When in doubt ask your personal legal advisor whether a conflict of interest exists. Introduction Section 4.3 for Members of Councils and Local Boards At some point, a question may arise as to whether
More informationPREVIOUS CHAPTER 10:18 OMBUDSMAN ACT
TITLE 10 TITLE 10 PREVIOUS CHAPTER Chapter 10:18 OMBUDSMAN ACT Acts 16/1982, 24/1985, 8/1988, 1/1989, 3/1994, 22/2001. ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY Section 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation.
More informationKARL FEIGNER Plaintiff/Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA KWAZULU NATAL, DURBAN CASE: 438/2010 In the matter between: KARL FEIGNER Plaintiff/Respondent vs THE BODY CORPORATE First Defendant/Applicant OF THE LIGHTHOUSE MALL JUDGMENT
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE CIRCUIT COURT, EAST LONDON) BLUE NIGHTINGALE TRADING 397 (PTY) LTD t/a SIYENZA GROUP
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE CIRCUIT COURT, EAST LONDON) REPORTABLE CASE NO. EL881/15 ECD 1681/15 In the matter between: BLUE NIGHTINGALE TRADING 397 (PTY) LTD t/a SIYENZA GROUP Applicant
More informationIN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (HELD AT JOHANNESBURG)
1 IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (HELD AT JOHANNESBURG) In the matter between MOLOKO SALPHINA Case No: JR 1568/02 Applicant and Commissioner NTSOANE DIALE CCMA HYPERAMA (MAYVILLE) 1 st Respondent
More informationNONTSAPO GETRUDE BANGANI THE LAND REFORM THE REGIONAL LAND CLAIMS COMMISSION FULL BENCH APPEAL JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE DIVISION) APPEAL CASE NO. CA25/2016 Reportable Yes / No In the matter between: NONTSAPO GETRUDE BANGANI Appellant and THE MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND
More informationSteering Point. Duties of directors and prescribed officers under the Companies Act. Companies Act Series No: 6 October 2014.
www.pwc.co.za/companies-act Companies Act Series No: 6 October 2014 Steering Point Duties of directors and prescribed officers under the Companies Act An overview of the duties of directors and prescribed
More informationCHAPTER 60:02 TITLE TO LAND (PRESCRIPTION AND LIMITATION) ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS
Title to Land (Prescription and Limitation) 3 CHAPTER 60:02 TITLE TO LAND (PRESCRIPTION AND LIMITATION) ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS SECTION 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation. 3. Title by prescription to
More information