100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
MRL3701 INSOLVENCY LAW JAN/FEB 2022 EXAM. $3.20   Add to cart

Exam (elaborations)

MRL3701 INSOLVENCY LAW JAN/FEB 2022 EXAM.

 71 views  1 purchase
  • Course
  • Institution

MRL3701 INSOLVENCY LAW JAN/FEB 2022 EXAM. QUESTION 1 1.1 Epstein v Epstein 1987 (4) SA 606 (C) Legal Question – is “friendly/ cordial sequestration blocked from a temporary sequestration request being granted? Facts – the candidate in an application for temporary sequestration request was...

[Show more]

Preview 2 out of 8  pages

  • June 9, 2022
  • 8
  • 2021/2022
  • Exam (elaborations)
  • Questions & answers
avatar-seller
INSOLVENCY LAW MRL3701
STUDENT NUMBER 66785871
JAN/FEB 2022 EXAM
23 February 2022




QUESTION 1
1.1 Epstein v Epstein 1987 (4) SA 606 (C)
Legal Question – is “friendly/ cordial sequestration blocked from a temporary sequestration
request being granted?
Facts – the candidate in an application for temporary sequestration request was the
respondent’s mother, whom he owed R6000.00 and to whom he composed a letter advising
her of his inability to reimburse her credit, subsequently submitting a demonstration of
bankruptcy. The respondent’s father by marriage paid a measure of R2500.00 into trust
record of candidate’s attorney’s distribution among respondent’s banks after the
sequestration costs had been met. The aim was to forestall respondent’s detainment.
Sequestration costs being estimated at R1500.00, an amount of R1000.00 would then stay
for circulation. This is an example of a “well-disposed sequestration”.
Findings- no, however court ought to investigate such applications with specific
consideration to protect the interest of loan bosses. Application for a temporary
sequestration request was refused.




This study source was downloaded by 100000836267798 from CourseHero.com on 06-02-2022 12:25:11 GMT -05:00


https://www.coursehero.com/file/139593323/INSOLVENCY-LAW-MRL3701docx/

, Ratio decidendi- in an “amicable” sequestration, the borrower tries not to conform to
fundamental conventions for an application for deliberate acquiescence. Likewise, leasers
other than the “friendly” creditor don’t get notification ahead of time of the application nor
would they be able to pay heed to debtor’s financial position, as there is no assertion of
issues that lies for investigation. For these reasons there is a risk that a sequestration
request might be made in circumstances where it would indeed not be in light of a
legitimate concern for the gathering of the creditors as a whole. That is the reason the
courts pay special attention to the requirements Also, where a relative's presented of a little
commitment as the "price" for conceding a sequestration request, it was held that it ought
to hesitantly be approved. This system clashed with the standards basic the Act and the role
which it doled out to the court. It added up to standing up to the court with a not very
wholesome "carrot" to initiate it to give help in the event that it proved unable, and
wouldn't, otherwise do so. The court should oppose such unseemly cajolery .Although the
initial two necessities of giving a temporary request were fulfilled, the third prerequisite
connecting with benefit to lenders represented a problem .The concurrent creditors for this
situation could not have possibly gotten anything out of the home, in light of the fact that
the Receiver of Revenue had a preference case regarding arrear personal assessment, which
would in any occasion have gobbled up all that could have remained after payment of the
expenses of sequestration.


1.2 A sequestration request can be acquired by utilizing two strategies, the primary strategy
being called
Constrained sequestration. Mandatory sequestration results when a bank, entomb alia, can
demonstrate that the
Liquidity or reasonable valuation of a characteristic individual's home is not as much as his
nearby obligation, or
Where an individual has submitted an alleged demonstration of bankruptcy (for instance,
announcing a Nulla Bona to a
Sheriff executing a warrant of execution – (see Section 9 of the Insolvency Act).
The procedures are started by giving an application for sequestration as a notification of
Movement. The notification of movement is the principal record that will arrive at the
sheriff's office and is to be served
On the respondent (sec. 9).
Assuming the court is fulfilled that the candidate has demonstrated his case a temporary
sequestration request will be given. The temporary sequestration request will have a return
date and must be served by the sheriff.
The temporary sequestration request is a standard nisi and along these lines by suggestion a
break request, until the court at long last settles on the realities contained in the pertinent


This study source was downloaded by 100000836267798 from CourseHero.com on 06-02-2022 12:25:11 GMT -05:00


https://www.coursehero.com/file/139593323/INSOLVENCY-LAW-MRL3701docx/

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller Tutorexpert01. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for $3.20. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

80796 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now

Start selling

Recently viewed by you


$3.20  1x  sold
  • (0)
  Add to cart