MRL3701 Assignment 1
(ANSWERS) Semester 2 2023 -
GUARANTEED DISTINCTION
Good grades
Whatsapp +254740539068 for any assistance.
Case name Ratio dicendi of the case Area of insolvency law
applicable
a)Estate Wege v Strauss 2932 A trust cannot be a debtor Section 29 of the Insolvency
and therefore cannot be Act 24 of 1936.
AD 76
sequestrated.
, Case name Ratio dicendi of the case Area of insolvency law
applicable
a)Estate Wege v Strauss 2932 A trust cannot be a debtor Section 29 of the Insolvency
AD 76 and therefore cannot be Act 24 of 1936.
sequestrated.
b) Epstein v Epstein 1987 (4) Although a betting Friendly Sequestrations
transaction is an invalid
SA 606
agreement and unenforceable
in court, payment of such a
wavering debt is not a
disposition without value.
c) Pretorius’ Trustee v Van This case discusses the It does not address whether a
Blommenstein 1949 (1) SA requirement that three- trust can be a debtor and
fourths in value and in sequestrated.
267 (O)
number of the creditors who
proved their claims must
accept the offer of
composition to render it valid
and enforceable.
d) Magnum Financial Holdings The court must determine Section 26 of the Insolvency
(PTY) Ltd (In Litigation) v whether the defense of Act 24 of 1936.
Summerly and Another NNO "ordinary course of business"
1984 (1) SA 160 (W) and "intention to prefer" is
applicable in each case.
(ANSWERS) Semester 2 2023 -
GUARANTEED DISTINCTION
Good grades
Whatsapp +254740539068 for any assistance.
Case name Ratio dicendi of the case Area of insolvency law
applicable
a)Estate Wege v Strauss 2932 A trust cannot be a debtor Section 29 of the Insolvency
and therefore cannot be Act 24 of 1936.
AD 76
sequestrated.
, Case name Ratio dicendi of the case Area of insolvency law
applicable
a)Estate Wege v Strauss 2932 A trust cannot be a debtor Section 29 of the Insolvency
AD 76 and therefore cannot be Act 24 of 1936.
sequestrated.
b) Epstein v Epstein 1987 (4) Although a betting Friendly Sequestrations
transaction is an invalid
SA 606
agreement and unenforceable
in court, payment of such a
wavering debt is not a
disposition without value.
c) Pretorius’ Trustee v Van This case discusses the It does not address whether a
Blommenstein 1949 (1) SA requirement that three- trust can be a debtor and
fourths in value and in sequestrated.
267 (O)
number of the creditors who
proved their claims must
accept the offer of
composition to render it valid
and enforceable.
d) Magnum Financial Holdings The court must determine Section 26 of the Insolvency
(PTY) Ltd (In Litigation) v whether the defense of Act 24 of 1936.
Summerly and Another NNO "ordinary course of business"
1984 (1) SA 160 (W) and "intention to prefer" is
applicable in each case.
