MRL3701 EXAMPACK UPDATED 2023 Question & Answer

MRL3701 Revision PACK Questions. AnswersEXAM PACK MRL3701 Revision PACK Questions. AnswersNOTES Insolvency Law MRL301-M 1. INTRODUCTION TO INSOLVENCY LAW 1.1. Meaning of “insolvency” Section 2 of the Insolvency Act, 24 of 1936 (“Act”) – Definitions 'insolvent' when used as a noun, means a debtor whose estate is under sequestration and includes such a debtor before the sequestration of his estate, according to the context. 'insolvent estate' means an estate under sequestration. Everyday language
A person is unable to pay his debts = merely evidence of insolvency Legal test of insolvency
A debtor’s liabilities, fairly estimated, exceed his assets, fairly valued. A person is not treated as insolvent for legal purposes unless his estate has been sequestrated by an order of court, being a formal declaration that a debtor is insolvent granted either at request of: the debtor (voluntary sequestration); or one or more of the debtor’s creditors (compulsory sequestration). Only after a sequestration order has been granted, the consequences of the Act will apply for example Sections 26, 29, 30 and 31 making provision for some dispositions1 to be set aside. Although the dispositions have taken place before sequestration, the relevant sections of the Act may be invoked only after the court has sequestrated the debtor’s estate. 1.2. Purpose of a sequestration order The main objective of a sequestration order is to secure the orderly and equitable distribution of a debtor’s assets where they are insufficient to meet the claims of all his creditors. Once an order of sequestration is granted, a concursus creditorum (coming together of creditors) is established and the interests of creditors as a group enjoy preference over the interests of the individual creditor. Creditors who have proved a claim have the right to share with other proved creditors in the proceeds of the estate assets replacing their right to recover claims by judicial proceedings. Court won’t grant a sequestration order if no advantage to creditors has been shown and generally not when there is only one creditor. If debtor’s assets aren’t enough to cover the costs of sequestration, there is no sense in sequestrating his estate as creditors won’t get anything thus being a waste of time and money. The debtor is divested of his estate and can’t burden it with more debts. 1.3. What may be sequestrated? An Estate is usually conceived as: an estate that includes assets and liabilities; an estate that consists of liabilities only; the joint estate of spouses married in community of property; the separate estates of spouses married out of community of property; and a new estate of a debtor whose estate has been sequestrated. A Debtor may be: a natural person; a partnership; a deceased person and a person incapable of managing his own affairs; an external company that does not fall within the definition of external company, eg a foreign company that has not established a place of business in South Africa; and an entity or association of persons that is not a juristic person, eg a trust. 1 Refer to paragraph 10 below Ways to sequestrate an estate The Act provides for the sequestration of the ‘estate’ of a ‘debtor’MRL301-M Page 2 of 47 Section 2 of Act – Definitions 'debtor', in connection with the sequestration of the debtor's estate, means a person or a partnership or the estate of a person or partnership which is a debtor in the usual sense of the word, except a body corporate or a company or other association of persons which may be placed in liquidation under the law relating to Companies. A body corporate established in terms of the Sectional Titles Act, 95 of 2986, is a body corporate as defined in the Companies Act, 61 of 1973 and, therefore, not a debtor for purposes of the Act. 1.4. Jurisdiction of the court Which court has jurisdiction? As a rule, only a Provincial or Local Division of the High Court (“HC”) may adjudicate upon an insolvency matter, but a Magistrate’s Court (“MC”) may preside over prosecutions for criminal offences under the Act, setting aside of voidable dispositions and a few other matters if the jurisdictional limits are not exceeded. Jurisdiction over a debtor and his estate In terms of Section 149 of the Act, a court has jurisdiction over a debtor and his estate if: on the date of lodging, the debtor is domiciled or owns property, or is entitled to property, situated within the jurisdiction of the court; or at any time within the 12 months immediately preceding lodging, the debtor ordinarily resided or carried on business within the jurisdiction of the court. A person is domiciled at a particular place if he is lawfully present there and has the intention to settle there for an indefinite period (Section 1(2) of the Domicile Act, 3 of 1992). Jurisdiction in litigation against third parties Section 149 of the Act: It is not relevant where the trustee of an estate litigates against third parties. Competing courts – removal to another court A court having jurisdiction over a debtor may refuse or postpone proceedings if it appears to the court equitable or convenient that the estate should be sequestrated by another court. The inquiry is not where the sequestration order may more conveniently be granted, but where the estate may more conveniently be administered. 1.5. The Master A Master is appointed in terms of the Administration of Estates Act, 66 of 1965, to each of the areas of the Provincial Divisions of the HC and one of his most important functions is the custody of all documents relating to insolvent estates. For the performance of various functions the Master is entitled to charge fees, some being in cash, some by means of revenue stamps. The Master is a “creature of statute” and only has the powers granted to him by legislation. 1.6. Condonation of irregularities In terms of Section 157(1) of the Act, irregularities in procedure can be condoned in the following instances: where the irregularity has not caused a substantial injustice; or where the irregularity has caused a substantial injustice, but the prejudice to creditors can be remedied by an order of court. The courts have recognised the following additional grounds whereby an irregularity can be condoned: where a deviation is so slight as to fall within the maxim de minimis non curat lex (the law is not concerned with trifles); where all interested parties have waived compliance with the provisions of the Act; where the provision in question is not peremptory and has substantially been complied with; and where it was impossible to comply with the Act. 1.7. Historical overview South Africa followed Roman Dutch law regarding insolvencies, but in 1843 a landmark ordinance was passed changing the law and more specifically abolishing t