Mrl3701 insolvency law - Study guides, Class notes & Summaries

MRL3701 Exam Pack (UPDATED) for exam period 2023 (Questions and Answers). This pack includes past exam papers and answers covering 2018 - 2022. Feedback with detailed answers. Great help for exam revision and to save you time, and so you can see what questions are likely to be asked, and how to answer them. Covers theme questions too. Always helpful for assignments and exam preparations.

MRL3701 ASSIGNMENT 1 SEMESTER 2 - 2024 DUE DATE: 30 AUGUST 2024 1. Case name: Amod v Khan 1947 (2) SA 432 (N) 2. Ratio decidendi of the case: Even when all the requirements of section 12 were complied with, the court retained its discretion to grant or refuse a sequestration order. 3. Area of Insolvency Law applicable: Compulsory Sequestration.

MRL3701 Assignment 1 Full Solutions Semester 2 2024 - DUE 30 August 2024 ;100 % TRUSTED workings, Expert Solved, Explanations and Solutions. For assistance call or W.h.a.t.s.a.p.p us on ...(.+.2.5.4.7.7.9.5.4.0.1.3.2)........... 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 (F...

MRL3701 ASSIGNMENT 1 MEMO - SEMESTER 2 - 2024 - UNISA - DUE : 30 AUGUST 2024 - UNIQUE NUMBER:- ( FULLY REFERENCED WITH FOOTNOTES- DISTINCTION GUARANTEED) QUESTION: 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. 2. 3. Case name: Ex Parte Snooke 2014 (5) SA 426 (FB) Ratio decidendi of the case: This was an applica...

MRL3701 PORTFOLIO MEMO - OCT./NOV. 2023 - SEMESTER 2 - UNISA - DUE 26 OCTOBER 2023 - DETAILED ANSWERS WITH FOOTNOTES & BIBLIOGRAPHY- DISTINCTION GUARANTEED! Question 1 CONFIDENTIAL 8 of 11 1.1 Explain when a formal defect in an application for the sequestration of an insolvent estate will be considered as fatal. (5) 1.2 Explain why the court in Ex Parte Arntzen (Nedbank Ltd as Intervening Creditor) 2013 (1) SA 49 (KZP) held that creditors are more vulnerable in voluntary surrender appli...

Well-structured MRL3701 Assignment 1 (ANSWERS) Semester 2 2024 - DISTINCTION GUARANTEED. (DETAILED ANSWERS - DISTINCTION GUARANTEED!)..... 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 c...

MRL3701 PORTFOLIO MEMO - MAY/JUNE 2024 - SEMESTER 1 - UNISA - DUE DATE :- 20 MAY 2024 - DETAILED ANSWERS WITH REFERENCES - DISTINCTION GUARANTEED Question 1 1.1 When a debtor is sequestrated, a Master is appointed to administer the estate. Answer the following questions regarding the appointment of the Master: (5) (a) In terms of which piece of legislation is the Master appointed? [1] (b) What is the pivotal role and function of the Master? [2] (c) What is meant by saying the Master is ...

MRL3701 (Insolvency Law) Assignment 1 (Semester 1 2024). Exceptional Attention to Detail in Footnotes, Bibliography, and Overall Quality Assurance! I am pleased to submit my work for your review, and I want to emphasize the meticulous care taken in incorporating footnotes and bibliography. I have adhered strictly to the guidelines, and the work has undergone a thorough double-check to ensure you are receiving nothing short of the BEST QUALITY. Good luck with your studies!!!

Insolvency Law (MRL3701) - Exam Questions and Answers Elaborate questions and answers for revision before exams

A SUMMARY OF THE FOLLOWING INSOLVENCY LAW CASES: 1. Magnum Financial Holdings; 2. Ex parte Henning; 3. Epstein v Epstein; 4. Amod v Kahn; 5. Vorster v Steyn; 6. Estate Wege v Strauss; 7. Pretorius' Trustee; 8. Hendriks NO v Swanepoel; 9. Pretorius NO v Stock Owners' Co-operative; 10. Prinsloo en ’n ander v Van Zyl; 11. Rand Air (Pty) Ltd v Ray Bester Investments, etc.