In a February 2025 judgment, the high court declared two master rental agreements void, finding that the appellant company’s supposed representative who signed the agreements did not have the authority to bind the appellant. The directors resolution provided by the appellant was limited in scope to tax affairs. The purported delegation of authority by the

A provident fund entered into an investment consulting agreement but subsequently contended that the signatories were not authorised and that the agreement was beyond its powers granted by the fund rules.

Although there were strong objections to the agreement at the trustees meeting approving the agreement, no voting took place but the decision to appoint