Macadamia Finance Bpk en 'n Ander v De Wet en Andere NNO

• Jurisdiction: South Africa

Macadamia Finance Bpk en 'n Ander v De Wet en Andere NNO
1993 (2) SA 743 (A)

1993 (2) SA p743

Citation	1993 (2) SA 743 (A)
Court	Appèlafdeling
Judge	Botha AR, Van Heerden AR, Vivier AR, Eksteen AR, Harms Wn AR
Heard	February 18, 1993
Judgment	March 11, 1993

Flynote : Sleutelwoorde

Maatskappy — Likwidasie — Die likwidateur — Bevoegdhede en verpligtinge — Geen bepaling in Maatskappywet 61 van 1973 wat likwidateur magtig om bates van maatskappy aan te wend ter versekering van bates van 'n ander maatskappy waarvan hy nie likwidateur is nie. H

Headnote : Kopnota

'n Likwidateur van 'n maatskappy in likwidasie het die bevoegdhede en verpligtings wat aan hom toegeken word deur die bepalings van die Maatskappywet 61 van 1973. Hy is verplig, onder meer, volgens art 391 van die Wet, om die bates van die maatskappy aan te wend ter vereffening van die eise van die skuldeisers van die maatskappy. Daar is geen bepaling wat hom magtig om die bates van die maatskappy onder sy beheer aan te wend ter I versekering van die bates van 'n ander maatskappy waarvan hy nie likwidateur is nie. Likwidateurs beskik nie oor enige magte buite die bepalings van die Wet ten opsigte van bates buiten dié van die maatskappy onder hulle beheer nie.

Die beslissing in die Transvaalse Provinsiale Afdeling in Macadamia Finance Ltd en 'n Ander v De Wet en Andere NNO 1991 (4) SA 273 bevestig. J

1993 (2) SA p744

Flynote : Sleutelwoorde

Company — Winding-up — The liquidator — Powers and duties — No provision in Companies Act 61 of 1973 empowering A liquidator to apply assets of company for the purpose of insuring assets of another company of which he is not liquidator.

Headnote : Kopnota

A liquidator of a company in liquidation has the powers and duties which the provisions of the Companies Act 61 of 1973 have conferred upon him. He is obliged, inter alia, according to s 391 of the Act, to apply the assets B of the company in settlement of the claims of the creditors of the company. There is no provision which authorises him to apply the assets of the company under his control for the purpose of insuring the assets of another company of which he is not the liquidator. A liquidator does not have any powers outside the provisions of the Act in respect of assets other than those of the company under his control.

The decision in the Transvaal Provincial Division in Macadamia Finance Ltd C en 'n Ander v De Wet en Andere NNO 1991 (4) SA 273 confirmed.

Case Information

Appèl teen 'n beslissing in die Transvaalse Provinsiale Afdeling (De D Villiers R), gerapporteer te 1991 (4) SA 273. Die feite blyk uit voormelde verslag en uit die uitspraak van Botha AR.

J J le Roux (bygestaan deur M C Botha) namens die appellante het na die volgende gesag verwys: R v Milne and Erleigh (7) 1951 (1) SA 791 (A) op 827F-828A; Langeberg Koöperasie Bpk v Inverdoorn Farming & Trading Co Ltd E 1965 (2) SA 597 (A) op 606D-G; Zandberg v Van Zyl 1910 AD 302 op 309, 310; Robinson v Randfontein Estates Gold Mining Co Ltd 1921 AD 168 op 196-7; AMS Marketing Co v Holzman and Another 1983 (3) SA 263 (W) op 269H; Trotman and Another v Edwick 1951 (1) SA 443 (A) op 449B-C; Lillicrap, Wassenaar & Partners v Pilkington Bros (SA) (Pty) Ltd 1985 (1) SA 475 (A) F op 505H-I; Swart v Van der Vyver 1970 (1) SA 633 (A) op 643C-G; ISEP Structural Engineering and Plating (Pty) Ltd v Inland Exploration Co (Pty) Ltd 1981 (4) SA 1 (A) op 9D-E; Pioneer Concrete Services Ltd v Yelnah (Pty) Ltd and Others 11 ACLR 108 op 119; Dennis Willcox (Pty) Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation 14 ACLR 156 op 161; DHN Food Distributors Ltd v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council; Bronze Investments Ltd v Same; G DHN Food Transport Ltd v Same [1976] 1 WLR 852 (CA) op 860a-e, 861d-e; Lategan and Another NNO v Boyes and Another 1980 (4) SA 191 (T) op 201H; Harold Holdsworth & Co (Wakefield) Ltd v Caddies [1955] 1 WLR 352 (CA) op 367-8; The Littlewoods Organisation Ltd v Harris [1978] (1) All ER 1026 (CA) op 1036d-h; Re Hellenic & General Trust Ltd [1975] 3 All ER 382 (Ch) H op 385h-386g; Lindgren v L & P Estates Co Ltd [1968] 1 All ER 917 (CA) op 922E-F, 928; Re Clarke's Will 204 Minn 574 op 578 (284 NW 876 (1939)); Adcock-Ingram Laboratories Ltd v SA Druggists Ltd and Another; Adcock-Ingram Laboratories Ltd v Lennon Ltd 1983 (2) SA 350 (T) op 352D-353B; Ritz Hotel Ltd v Charles of the Ritz Ltd and Another 1988 (3) SA 290 (A) op 314H-316B; Revlon Inc v Cripps and Lee Ltd and Others [1980] I FSR 85 (CA) op 105; Re Security Bank Ltd (No 2) (1978) 2 NZLR op 157 et seq; Lonrho Ltd v Shell Petroleum Co Ltd [1980] 2 WLR 367 (CA) op 374B-G; Smith, Stone & Knight Ltd v Lord Mayor, Aldermen and Citizens of the City of Birmingham [1939] 4 All ER 116 (KB) op 121B-E; Gower Principles of Modern Company Law 4de uitg op 117-20; Botha 'Recognition of the Group J Concept in Company Law' 1982 De Iure 107 op 118; Cilliers en

1993 (2) SA p745

A Benade Maatskappyereg 4de uitg para 31.42 op 560; Botha 'Holding and Subsidiary Companies: Fiduciary Duties or Directors' 1983 De Iure 234 op 236-4; Cilliers, Benade, Botha, Oosthuizen en De la Rey Corporate Law 1ste uitg para 17.08 op 227; Wilken v Kohler 1913 AD 135 op 150; Tiopaizi v Bulawayo Municipality 1923 AD 317 op 326; Ebrahim v Pretoria Stadsraad 1980 (4) SA 10 (T) op 15B; Joubert (red) The Law of South Africa band 14 B para 39; Benade 'Verontagsaming van die Selfstandigheid van die Maatskappyregspersoon' 1967 THRHR 213 op 224; Rixon 'Lifting the Veil between Holding and Subsidiary Companies' 102 Law Quarterly...