Prejudice to a surety will only release the surety from liability if the prejudice is the result of a breach of a legal duty or obligation owed by the creditor. The primary sources of a creditor’s duties and obligations are the principal agreement and the suretyship. If the prejudice complained of results from conduct falling

The Constitutional Court refused leave to appeal against the Supreme Court of Appeal decision that a “binding offer” to a creditor in business rescue proceedings, made under s 153(1)(b)(ii) of the 2008 Companies Act, is not automatically binding on the creditor.

The appeal had “no prospects of success” which effectively confirms the correctness of the

In an important judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of Appeal on 20 May 2015 in African Banking Corporation of Botswana Ltd v Kariba Furniture Manufacturers (Pty) Ltd and others, the Supreme Court of Appeal held that a purportedly binding offer made to a creditor, who opposes a business rescue plan, is not automatically

If the board of directors of a company refuses or is unable to institute legal proceedings to recover any loss suffered by the company from a third party, an aggrieved shareholder or director should not rely on Section 163 of the Companies Act to obtain permission from a court to institute or continue legal proceedings

The latest appeal court decision of New Port Finance Co v Nedbank reinforces our view that every suretyship securing a company’s debts should specifically preserve the creditor’s rights against a surety despite discharge of any part of the principal debt by a business rescue plan and that creditors should ensure that claims against sureties are