FILTERS:

A final response

31 March 2011

I am not going to respond at length to Mr Nqhome's latest response - Companies in liquidation - response III dated 15th February 2010. So far it seems that Mr. Nqhome has chosen to ignore what it was that the judge explained so succinctly about the development of the situation surrounding insolvency/liquidation in comparison to the English bankruptcy courts in the case of Gilbert v Bekker and another 1984 (3) 774 (W). The matter surrounding jurisdiction and power is also a little beside the point for the sake of this argument, except that the Companies Act clearly provides all the powers the Master of the High Court requires to supervise the process. In fact, Mr. Nqhome rather proves my point in paragraph 3 of his response with the "emphasis added" by him.

The wording of section 417 (1) of the Companies Act is clearly in mind with my argument: "…the Master or the Court…." Can only mean "…normally the Master or when petitioned to intervene, the Court….". How else can one understand that? The wording of the Act clearly anticipates this in other sections as well, as I have already pointed out previously. The very sections Mr. Nqhome refers to in his final paragraph. Mr. Nqhome quotes from section 354 and proves that the Court intervenes on application!

Also, if it is not supervision by the Court as referred to in section 56(1)(b) of the Deeds Registries Act 47/1937 that is performed by the Master of the High Court, then please explain to me what exactly it is that the Master does in case of liquidations, insolvencies, deceased estates, etc? Why the title Master of the High Court? It is clear that the Court has neither the staff nor the infrastructure to perform the supervising task, and neither the Companies Act nor any other Act that I am aware of provide the Registrar of the High Court with any powers to perform such a duty.

It can only be the Master who performs the supervision as referred to in section 56(1)(b) Act 47/1937, whose actions in turn will always be subject to review by the Court, who will intervene when petitioned to do so by some interested party.
Amen
Dudley Lee
30/3/2011


Submit your comment:
 
Name
EMail
Comments
Security Picture (click to change)
Word shown in picture: