Oppressive Conduct - Companies Act

In a recent decision of the Supreme Court of Appeal, the court…

CIPC's New Compliance Reporting

From 5 March 2020, when filing annual returns, almost all companies…

Force Majeure Explained

Under South African law, if it becomes impossible for a party…

Contract interpretation and tacit terms

In a recent appeal before the Supreme Court, the court was asked…

Simulated transactions and controlled foreign companies: Sasol V SARS

A simulated transaction is one which expresses an ostensible…

Do your contractual warranties properly cover your business risks

In a recent appeal before the Supreme Court, the court was asked…

Contractual warranties and their interpretation

Before the decision of the Supreme Court of Appeal in Paulsen v Slip Knot Investments (434/13) [2014] ZASCA, there was uncertainty on whether the in duplum rule applied only to default interest, being interest accrued on a capital amount which has fallen due for payment but has not been paid, or whether it also applied to interest accrued on capital which has not yet become payable. The Supreme Court removed this uncertainty by finding that the in duplum rule applies in both cases.