- New Bill Prohibiting Foreign Land Ownership In South Africa
- Why purchasers should not shy away from the costs of hiring an expert to inspect the property to be acquired
- Security for costs when instituting proceedings in a South African court
- Conducting disciplinary enquiries – when do you not need to counsel an employee for poor work performance and what knowledge can the chairperson have of the dispute prior to the enquiry?
- The Promotion of Access to Information Act and its impact on private bodies
When a natural or juristic person sells assets comprising a business or a substantial part of that person’s business, Section 34 of the Insolvency Act renders such sale void as against any creditor of that person if the sale is not advertised as prescribed in such section.
In practice, especially when transactions need to take place quickly, the parties often elect not to advertise the sale in terms of the Insolvency Act and instead accept warranties regarding possible claims against the Seller. The recent Supreme Court of Appeal case of Gainsford NO and 2 others v Tiffski Property Investments and 5 others [Gavin Cecil Gainsford NO v Tiffski Property Investments (Pty) Ltd (874/2010)  ZASCA 187 (30 September 2011)] highlights the dangers of concluding a transaction in this manner. Continue reading