dc.date.accessioned | 2021-05-27T12:13:55Z | |
dc.date.available | 2021-05-27T12:13:55Z | |
dc.identifier.citation | [2021] ZACC 40 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 2022 (3) SA 432 (CC) | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/36777 | |
dc.title | Shiva Uranium (Proprietary) Limited and Another v Mahomed Mahier Tayob and Others | en_US |
dc.identifier.casenumber | CCT 305/20 | |
dc.date.hearing | 19 August 2021 | |
dc.contributor.judge | Rogers AJ | |
dc.date.judgment | 9 November 2021 | |
dc.link.judgment | https://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/handle/20.500.12144/36777/%5bJudgment%5d%20CCT%20305-20%20Shiva%20Uranium%20%28Pty%29%20Ltd%20and%20Another%20v%20Mahomed%20Tayob%20and%20Others.pdf?sequence=12&isAllowed=y | |
dc.concourt.synopsis | Companies Act 71 of 2008 — business rescue — practitioner appointed in terms of section 130(6)(a) — resignation — section 139(3) — company to appoint substitute | |
dc.concourt.casehistory | On appeal from the Supreme Court of Appeal |