The provisions governing the winding-up of co-operatives are reflected in the Co-operatives Act No. 14 of 2005 and its regulations.
How are co-operatives wound up?
Business rescue regime in South African law, was established in the Companies Act of 2008 to prevent the liquidation of financially distressed companies and to facilitate their restructuring and revival. Business rescue is not just a legal process, but a lifeline for struggling businesses. The primary goal of business rescue is to maximize the chances of a company's successful recovery while also considering and minimizing any potential harm to stakeholders, who are not just participants, but key contributors to the process.
The rescue of a company in business rescue ultimately depends on the implementation of a viable business rescue plan which has received the support of 75% of the creditors of the company. A recent business rescue case of Wescoal Mining (Pty) Ltd Another v Mkhombo NO1 and Other has potentially wide-ranging implications for creditors after business rescue has commenced.
AfDB to support HealthTech Hub Africa’s blueprint to fast-track health technology innovations across Africa
“A look at current trending topics in the world of Insolvency Law.”
A business rescue plan (a plan) should ideally benefit all affected persons in the best way possible, and a vote in support of its adoption or rejection should not be premised purely on self-interest while disregarding the collective benefit of all affected persons.
A recent High Court judgment highlighted this fact, setting aside the major creditors' votes on the grounds of inappropriateness, and investigating the creditors' conduct during the business rescue process.
The new Italian Insolvency Code came into effect on 15 July 2022, effectively changing the status quo by attempting to resolve the financial distress of companies and minimise damage through restructuring outstanding debt. The code makes restructuring frameworks the first measure to help debtors restructure their debt to prevent further insolvency and liquidation. More importantly, it is a break from the status quo in insolvency law whereby maximising a creditor’s return is of the utmost importance. Instead, preserving the company as a going concern becomes a protected value.
In the case of Bester N.O & Others v Mirror Trading International Proprietary Limited (in liquidation) t/a MTI, the Western Cape Division of the High Court considered whether cryptocurrencies fell within the definition of property under the context of the Insolvency Act and whether courts in South Africa had jurisdiction in respect of cryptocurrency.
In NSP Unsgaard (Pty) Ltd v Master of the High Court, Cape Town and Another, the applicant, NSP Unsgaard (Pty) Ltd sought to review and set aside a decision of the first respondent, the Master of the High Court made on 28 January 2022 in terms of section 46 of the Insolvency Act,1936 (“the Act”). The decision in question permitted the liquidators of the second respondent, Green Tissue (Pty) Ltd ), to disregard a set off applied by NSP in its dealings with Green Tissue before the latter’s liquidation.
This is an important update in the Australian corporate and insolvency law context because, in BTI 2014 LLC v Sequana SA and others [2022] UKSC 25, the UK Supreme Court (being the UK’s highest court) confirmed the existence of a duty owed by directors to creditors in certain circumstances (creditor duty). Under the common law and equity (together, general law), there is a gateway to applicability of the creditor duty in Australia.