Show simple item record

dc.date.accessioned 2017-04-08T17:04:56Z
dc.date.available 2017-04-08T17:04:56Z
dc.date.created 2006-02-24 en
dc.identifier.citation 2007 (5) SA 525 (CC)
dc.identifier.citation 2007 (2) BCLR 125 (CC)
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/2528
dc.title Giddey NO v JC Barnard and Partners en
dc.title.alternative CCT65/05 en
dc.identifier.casenumber CCT65/05 en
dc.contributor.judge O'Regan J
dc.date.judgment 1 September 2006
dc.link.judgment http://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/handle/20.500.12144/2528/Full%20judgment%20%28130%20Kb%29-7745.pdf?sequence=18&isAllowed=y
dc.concourt.synopsis Application concerning the interpretation and application of s13 of the Companies Act. The question was how a court should approach the exercise of s13 discretion given that section 34 of the Constitution entrenches the right to have disputes resolved by courts. O'Regan J held in a majority judgment that on appeal the exercise of discretion by a court in terms of s.13 will only be interfered with if it was not exercised judicially or on the basis of incorrect facts or principles of law. The appeal was dismissed.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search ConCourt Collections


Browse

My Account