Lipschitz NO v Udc Bank Ltd
| Jurisdiction | South Africa |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
56 practice notes
-
Botha (Now Griessel) and Another v Finanscredit (Pty) Ltd
...Law at 77 - 9; Sandmann v Schaefer 1969 (4) SA 524 (SWA); Smith v Rand Bank Bpk 1979 (4) SA 228 (N); Lipschitz NO v UDC Bank Ltd 1979 (1) SA 789 (A); Mutual Life Insurance Co of New York v Ingle 1910 TPD G 540; Kalk v Barclays National Bank Ltd 1983 (3) SA 619 (A); Swart v Vosloo 1965 (1) S......
-
Sasfin (Pty) Ltd v Beukes
...An approach founded on similar considerations appears to underlie the conclusion reached by Miller JA in Lipschitz NO v UDC Bank Ltd 1979 (1) SA 789 (A) at 808C - Furthermore, it seems to me, as a matter of principle, that when dealing with an agreement which is invalid because it contains ......
-
Commissioner for Inland Revenue v Pick 'n Pay Employee Share Purchase Trust
...any company in the group. That follows from the prohibition against a company purchasing its own shares: Lipschitz NO v UDC Bank Ltd 1979 (1) SA 789 (A) at 797H-798A; AA Mutual Insurance Association Ltd v Century D Insurance Co Ltd 1986 (4) SA 93 (A) at 101D-E; and the further prohibition c......
-
Lewis v Oneanate (Pty) Ltd and Another
...but subject to the mortgage bond. Held, accordingly, that ground (1) of the exception had to be dismissed. Lipschitz NO v UDC Bank Ltd 1979 (1) SA 789 (A) Held, further, as to the alleged vagueness of the contract, that the fact that the agreement was generally inelegant, clumsy in expressi......
Request a trial to view additional results
51 cases
-
Botha (Now Griessel) and Another v Finanscredit (Pty) Ltd
...Law at 77 - 9; Sandmann v Schaefer 1969 (4) SA 524 (SWA); Smith v Rand Bank Bpk 1979 (4) SA 228 (N); Lipschitz NO v UDC Bank Ltd 1979 (1) SA 789 (A); Mutual Life Insurance Co of New York v Ingle 1910 TPD G 540; Kalk v Barclays National Bank Ltd 1983 (3) SA 619 (A); Swart v Vosloo 1965 (1) S......
-
Sasfin (Pty) Ltd v Beukes
...An approach founded on similar considerations appears to underlie the conclusion reached by Miller JA in Lipschitz NO v UDC Bank Ltd 1979 (1) SA 789 (A) at 808C - Furthermore, it seems to me, as a matter of principle, that when dealing with an agreement which is invalid because it contains ......
-
Commissioner for Inland Revenue v Pick 'n Pay Employee Share Purchase Trust
...any company in the group. That follows from the prohibition against a company purchasing its own shares: Lipschitz NO v UDC Bank Ltd 1979 (1) SA 789 (A) at 797H-798A; AA Mutual Insurance Association Ltd v Century D Insurance Co Ltd 1986 (4) SA 93 (A) at 101D-E; and the further prohibition c......
-
Lewis v Oneanate (Pty) Ltd and Another
...but subject to the mortgage bond. Held, accordingly, that ground (1) of the exception had to be dismissed. Lipschitz NO v UDC Bank Ltd 1979 (1) SA 789 (A) Held, further, as to the alleged vagueness of the contract, that the fact that the agreement was generally inelegant, clumsy in expressi......
Request a trial to view additional results
5 books & journal articles
-
Die kapitaal van 'n beslote korporasie en die beskerming van skuldeisers
...(HL); Guinness v Land Corporation of Ireland (1883) 22 ChD 349 (CA); Cohen v Segal 1970 (3) SA 702 (W); Lipschitz NO v UDC Bank Ltd 1979 (1) SA 789 (A); en Cilliers & Benade op cit noot 1 op 313. Die gemeenregtelike beginsel van aandelekapitaalinstandhouding word verder aangevul deur 'n hel......
-
Groups / Groepe : caput 6
...corporation.13 In terms 9 Section 40.10 See sections 40 and 63(f). 11 UDC Bank v Lipschitz 1977 1 SA 275 (W) 286; Lipschitz v UDC Bank 1979 1 SA 789 (A). 12 Section 295 (1). 13 Geach and Schoeman Guide 150of section 295(2), those particulars do not have to be disclosed in a holding company’......
-
Loans to Directors—An Analysis of Section 226 of the Companies Act
...71 Supra note 4. 72 Stegmann J does not refer to the report in his judgment. 73 Supra note 56 at 662E—F. 74 Lipschitz No v UDC Bank 1979 (1) SA 789 (A) at 804D (per Miller JA). 75 S v Pourolis supra note 4 at 589C—F. © Juta and Company (Pty) LOANS TO DIRECTORS — ANALYSIS OF SECTION 226 OF T......
-
The Introduction of the Statutory Merger in South African Corporate Law: Majority Rule Offset by the Appraisal Right (Part 1)
...to the company. The benefit to Company H is discussedshortly.152See further par 6.2 below.153See further Lipschitz NO v UDC Bank Ltd 1979 (1) SA 789 (A).154See Gilson op cit note 2 at 530.STATUTORY MERGER: MAJORITY RULE AND APPRAISAL RIGHT 29© Juta and Company (Pty) the triangular merger i......
Request a trial to view additional results
56 provisions
-
Botha (Now Griessel) and Another v Finanscredit (Pty) Ltd
...Law at 77 - 9; Sandmann v Schaefer 1969 (4) SA 524 (SWA); Smith v Rand Bank Bpk 1979 (4) SA 228 (N); Lipschitz NO v UDC Bank Ltd 1979 (1) SA 789 (A); Mutual Life Insurance Co of New York v Ingle 1910 TPD G 540; Kalk v Barclays National Bank Ltd 1983 (3) SA 619 (A); Swart v Vosloo 1965 (1) S......
-
Sasfin (Pty) Ltd v Beukes
...An approach founded on similar considerations appears to underlie the conclusion reached by Miller JA in Lipschitz NO v UDC Bank Ltd 1979 (1) SA 789 (A) at 808C - Furthermore, it seems to me, as a matter of principle, that when dealing with an agreement which is invalid because it contains ......
-
Commissioner for Inland Revenue v Pick 'n Pay Employee Share Purchase Trust
...any company in the group. That follows from the prohibition against a company purchasing its own shares: Lipschitz NO v UDC Bank Ltd 1979 (1) SA 789 (A) at 797H-798A; AA Mutual Insurance Association Ltd v Century D Insurance Co Ltd 1986 (4) SA 93 (A) at 101D-E; and the further prohibition c......
-
Lewis v Oneanate (Pty) Ltd and Another
...but subject to the mortgage bond. Held, accordingly, that ground (1) of the exception had to be dismissed. Lipschitz NO v UDC Bank Ltd 1979 (1) SA 789 (A) Held, further, as to the alleged vagueness of the contract, that the fact that the agreement was generally inelegant, clumsy in expressi......
Request a trial to view additional results