RRLLB81
Assignment 2
Semester 2 2025
Due September 2025
,A JURISPRUDENTIAL ANALYSIS OF IMPEACHABLE DISPOSITIONS IN SOUTH
AFRICAN INSOLVENCY LAW
By
[RRLLB81 STUDENT]
SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DEGREE BACHELOR OF LAWS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL AND
PROCEDURAL LAW SCHOOL OF LAW UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA
September 2025
, Abstract
This dissertation undertakes a jurisprudential analysis of impeachable dispositions in
South African insolvency law, with particular focus on Section 26 of the Insolvency Act
24 of 1936, which governs “dispositions without value.” The study traces the historical
evolution of judicial reasoning, from early restrictive interpretations of “value” to later
more expansive and pragmatic approaches, before critically examining the Supreme
Court of Appeal’s landmark judgment in Strydom N.O. v Snowball Wealth (Pty) Ltd.
The Strydom decision narrowed the scope of Section 26 by holding that “dispositions
not for value” are limited to cases where no value whatsoever is received. While this
approach promotes transactional certainty, it arguably weakens creditor protection,
undermining the doctrine of concursus creditorum. The paper highlights the doctrinal,
procedural, and practical challenges that follow from this restrictive interpretation.
Through comparative analysis with the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United
States, the study demonstrates how foreign jurisdictions address undervalue or
uncommercial transactions through specific statutory provisions. Drawing on these
comparative lessons, it proposes legislative reform in South Africa to incorporate a
statutory “inadequate value” test, thereby reconciling creditor protection with commercial
stability.
The dissertation concludes that without statutory reform, South African insolvency law
risks entrenching inequities that privilege contractual freedom over creditor justice,
thereby eroding the foundational objectives of insolvency jurisprudence.
, Table of Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................... 2
Chapter One: Introduction ............................................................................................... 5
1.1 Background of the Study ....................................................................................... 5
1.2 Statement of the Problem ...................................................................................... 6
1.3 Objectives of the Study .......................................................................................... 7
1.4 Research Hypotheses ........................................................................................... 8
1.5 Significance of the Study ....................................................................................... 8
1.6 Scope of the Study ................................................................................................ 9
1.7 Definition of Terms ............................................................................................... 10
Chapter Two: Literature Review and Theoretical Framework ........................................ 11
2.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 11
2.2 South African Literature ....................................................................................... 11
2.3 Judicial Development of “Value” .......................................................................... 12
2.4 Comparative Perspectives ................................................................................... 13
2.5 Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................ 14
2.6 Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 15
Chapter Three: Research Methodology ........................................................................ 16
3.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 16
3.2 Research Philosophy ........................................................................................... 16
3.3 The Doctrinal Legal Method ................................................................................. 17
3.4 Jurisprudential Method ........................................................................................ 19
3.5 Comparative Methodology ................................................................................... 20
3.6 Analytical Framework ........................................................................................... 21
Assignment 2
Semester 2 2025
Due September 2025
,A JURISPRUDENTIAL ANALYSIS OF IMPEACHABLE DISPOSITIONS IN SOUTH
AFRICAN INSOLVENCY LAW
By
[RRLLB81 STUDENT]
SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DEGREE BACHELOR OF LAWS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL AND
PROCEDURAL LAW SCHOOL OF LAW UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA
September 2025
, Abstract
This dissertation undertakes a jurisprudential analysis of impeachable dispositions in
South African insolvency law, with particular focus on Section 26 of the Insolvency Act
24 of 1936, which governs “dispositions without value.” The study traces the historical
evolution of judicial reasoning, from early restrictive interpretations of “value” to later
more expansive and pragmatic approaches, before critically examining the Supreme
Court of Appeal’s landmark judgment in Strydom N.O. v Snowball Wealth (Pty) Ltd.
The Strydom decision narrowed the scope of Section 26 by holding that “dispositions
not for value” are limited to cases where no value whatsoever is received. While this
approach promotes transactional certainty, it arguably weakens creditor protection,
undermining the doctrine of concursus creditorum. The paper highlights the doctrinal,
procedural, and practical challenges that follow from this restrictive interpretation.
Through comparative analysis with the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United
States, the study demonstrates how foreign jurisdictions address undervalue or
uncommercial transactions through specific statutory provisions. Drawing on these
comparative lessons, it proposes legislative reform in South Africa to incorporate a
statutory “inadequate value” test, thereby reconciling creditor protection with commercial
stability.
The dissertation concludes that without statutory reform, South African insolvency law
risks entrenching inequities that privilege contractual freedom over creditor justice,
thereby eroding the foundational objectives of insolvency jurisprudence.
, Table of Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................... 2
Chapter One: Introduction ............................................................................................... 5
1.1 Background of the Study ....................................................................................... 5
1.2 Statement of the Problem ...................................................................................... 6
1.3 Objectives of the Study .......................................................................................... 7
1.4 Research Hypotheses ........................................................................................... 8
1.5 Significance of the Study ....................................................................................... 8
1.6 Scope of the Study ................................................................................................ 9
1.7 Definition of Terms ............................................................................................... 10
Chapter Two: Literature Review and Theoretical Framework ........................................ 11
2.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 11
2.2 South African Literature ....................................................................................... 11
2.3 Judicial Development of “Value” .......................................................................... 12
2.4 Comparative Perspectives ................................................................................... 13
2.5 Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................ 14
2.6 Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 15
Chapter Three: Research Methodology ........................................................................ 16
3.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 16
3.2 Research Philosophy ........................................................................................... 16
3.3 The Doctrinal Legal Method ................................................................................. 17
3.4 Jurisprudential Method ........................................................................................ 19
3.5 Comparative Methodology ................................................................................... 20
3.6 Analytical Framework ........................................................................................... 21
