A service provider can rely on a debtor/creditor as security for its claim. This type of lien, conferred by virtue of an agreement between the creditor and the debtor, is a sub-species of a broader right to retain physical control of another’s property, whether movable or immovable, as a mechanism for securing payment of a claim, until the claim has been met. In other words, the service provider, who makes provision for such a lien in its contract, can refuse to release goods which are in its possession until it has received payment.

In a recent judgement delivered by the Commercial Division of the Supreme Court in Atelier Etude Limousin & Ors vs BPCE International Et Outre Mer & Anor 2014 SCJ 166 the court confirmed the prevailing practice that foreign companies could be granted fixed or floating charges by Mauritian entity as security for a financing.

A long dispute between a father and son, which progressed through various courts, culminated in an application focusing on the court’s powers under section 387(3) of the old Companies Act (61 of 1973). That dispute was heard in the Western Cape High Court, which gave judgment on 10 July 2024 in the matter of Jurgens Johannes Steenkamp N.O. & 3 others v Mark Wehrley & 3 others.