MRL3701 Assignment 1 (COMPLETE ANSWERS) Semester 2 2024 - DUE 30 August 2024

MRL3701 Assignment 1 (COMPLETE ANSWERS) Semester 2 2024 - DUE 30 August 2024...Detailed work, solutions, memos, notes, and explanations........... See the table below and match the columns to answer the following questions. You must therefore answer the question as follows on your answer sheet (see ONLY AN EXAMPLE below) and do so for every question (a) – (e). (a) 1. Case name: Ex Parte Snooke 2014 (5) SA 426 (FB) 2. Ratio decidendi of the case: This was an application for rehabilitation. Several cases of abuses of the sequestration process. Attorneys should limit their fees and expenses to those stated in application and trustees may not consent to taxation of attorney's bill without it. The effects of rehabilitation in terms of s 124(3), if the order is granted, is to reinvest insolvent with his estate. 3. Area of Insolvency Law applicable: Rehabilitation and abuse of sequestration proceedings. MRL3701 Assessment 1 Semester 2 2024 3 Case Name: Ratio decidendi of the case: Area of Insolvency Law applicable: (a) Amod v Khan 1947 (2) SA 432 (N) The relief sought in a sequestration application is directed at diminishing the legal status and capacity of a particular individual debtor, so it should pertain to that debtor’s circumstances only. Section 9 (4A) of the Insolvency Act 24 of 1936. (b) Ex Parte Arntzen (Nedbank Ltd as Intervening Creditor) 2013 (1) SA 49 (KZP) The definition of “employees” in section 9(4A) includes all employees, as well as domestic employees. Compulsory Sequestration. (c) Harksen v Lane 1998 (1) SA 300(CC) Even when all the requirements of section 12 were complied with, the court retained its discretion to grant or refuse a sequestration order. Voluntary surrender of two individuals (in one application). (d) Strutfast (Pty) Ltd v Uys 2017 (6) SA 491 (GJ) The court confirmed that voluntary surrender applications must comply with the provisions in s 6(1) of the Act and the court must be satisfied that it will be to the advantage of creditors if the debtor’s estate is surrendered. Section 21 Insolvency Act 24 of 1936. (e) Stratford v Investec Bank Ltd 2015 (3) SA 1 (CC) Section 21 did not infringe the constitutional provisions and the temporary divestment of the solvent spouse was merely to ensure that the insolvent estate was not deprived of property to which it was entitled. Sections 3-6 of the Insolvency Act 24 of 1936.