Wellington Board of Executors Ltd and Another v Perlman

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Judge: Steyn J
• Judgment Date: 23 December 1953
• Citation: 1954 (1) SA 546 (C)
• Hearing Date: 23 December 1953
• Court: Cape Provincial Division

H Steyn, J.:

In this matter there are two applications before the Court for the sequestration of the estate of one David Louis Perlman. The first application is that of the Wellington Board of Executors Ltd., to whom I shall hereinafter refer as the first applicant, and the second application is that of Cohen, Perlman & Schneider, to whom I shall

Steyn J

hereinafter refer as the second applicant. Both applicants are to-day asking for a provisional order of sequestration.

The first applicant, after having obtained my consent to hear the application, had the matter set down for Saturday, the 19th December, 1953, but prior to the set down he advised the second applicant of his intention so to do, the reason being that when he gave the necessary A security for costs on the 18th December, 1953, in terms of sec. 9 (3) of the Insolvency Act, he ascertained that the second applicant had already lodged his security with the Master.

The reason why I allowed the matter to be set down for hearing on Saturday, the 19th December, instead of the normal day for hearing such applications, was because it was represented to me that the matter had some degree of urgency. When the first applicant appeared on Saturday B morning the second applicant also made representations about priority of hearing. In the result both applications stood down until to-day, the parties consenting thereto on the understanding that the question of priority should first be decided upon. Though the second applicant lodged security first, his petition was in fact signed on the 19th C December, 1953, whereas that of the first applicant was signed on the 18th December, 1953. I have already stated that the first applicant obtained a set down for the hearing before the second applicant, but, on this latter aspect it may be pointed out that the second applicant did not regard the...