Tag: Norton Rose Fulbright South Africa

In Kalagadi Manganese (Pty) Ltd and Others v Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa Ltd and Others (2020/12468) [2021] ZAGPJHC 127 (22 July 2021), the court provides some useful comments on the application of High Court Rule 41A requiring litigants to attempt to mediate their dispute, and the question of bad faith mediation.

An unrehabilitated insolvent, who is a nominated beneficiary in terms of a life insurance policy, is not entitled to the proceeds of the policy to the exclusion of the trustees of their insolvent estate.

In a dispute over whether an arbitration could be held to resolve the dispute between the parties, one party alleged that the arbitration agreement itself did not exist for lack of agreement between them.

The President has proclaimed that, from 1 December 2021, certain sections of the Cybercrimes Act, 2020 will come into full force.

A recent Cape High court judgment contains some useful guidance for insurers in adjusting COVID-19 business interruption claims involving recovery or remission of rental.

In order for a representative to be debarred, there must be non-compliance by the representative or the key individual of the financial services provider with, amongst other things, the 'fit and proper' requirements of the FAIS Act.

The judgement in Travelers Insurance Co Ltd v Armstrong and Another [2021] EWCA Civ 978 considered the interesting question of legal professional privilege, the rights of successors in title, and joint retainer privilege.

The Supreme Court of Appeal, in Pelham Stephanus Bothma and Others v Tertius Bothma N.O and Another (Case number 748/2019) [2021] ZASCA 46 (15 April 2021), re-affirmed the position regarding the interpretation of legal documents, re-stating the principle that only admissible evidence of context, conservatively applied, may be led in resolving an interpretation dispute.

Financial services providers (FSPs) registered under the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act 2002 fall within the ambit of ‘accountable institutions’ under the Financial Intelligence Centre Act 2001. As accountable institutions, these FSPs are obliged to comply with the FIC Act and are subject to oversight by the FSCA.

Evidence of experts in dispute hearings can be dealt with efficiently by using the ‘hot tub’ method to deal with disputes issue-by-issue rather than expert-by-expert.