BACKGROUND The High Court of Justice (Business and Property Courts of England and Wales) (the “Court”) heard a case in which, pursuant to section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996, Tricon Energy Limited (the “Claimant”) appealed an award granted by the arbitral tribunal (the “Tribunal”). MTM Trading LLC (the “Defendant”) was the owner of the
THE DEFAULT JUDGMENT The High Court of Justice (Business and Property Courts in Manchester) (the “Court”) heard a case in which Praetura Asset Finance Limited (the “Claimant”) sought to recover approximately £1,500,000.00 (One Million Five Hundred Thousand Pounds) from Derek Thomas Hood (the “Defendant”) in terms of an unregulated hire purchase agreement which involved a
BACKGROUND The Appellant, the South African Football Association (hereinafter referred to as “SAFA”), and the Respondent, Fli-Afrika Travel (Pty) Ltd (hereinafter referred to as “Fli-Afrika”) had a long-standing commercial relationship, in terms of which Fli-Afrika was SAFA’s travel agent. The subject of the appeal was two agreements concluded between the parties, namely a Service Level
BACKGROUND Atlantic Marine and Aviation LLP (the “Owner”), the defendant in the matter, chartered the ‘Atlantic Tonjer’, a multi-purpose support vessel (the “Vessel”), to the claimant, Boskalis Offshore Marine Contracting BV (“the “Charterer”) under the BIMCO SupplyTime 2017 Charter Party for Offshore Support Vessels (the “BIMCO Agreement”). A charter party is a deed or an
BACKGROUND Burlington Loan Management DAC and Bank of America N.A, the third and fourth claimants in the matter (collectively the “Lenders”), entered into a loan agreement (the “Loan Agreement”) with Fire Navigation Inc and Hurricane Navigation Inc, the first and second defendants in the matter (“collectively the Borrowers”). In terms of the Loan Agreement, the
SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND In or during May 2011, the claimants in the matter, namely Zedra Trust Company (Jersey) Limited and Oliver Nobahar-Cookson (collectively the “Claimants”) concluded a written sale and purchase agreement with The Hut Group Limited (the “Defendant”) wherein the Claimants agreed to sell their shares in Cent Ltd (the “Company”) to the Defendant
SUMMARY AND ARBITRATION AWARD This matter was an appeal from an arbitration award, over the correct interpretation of two clauses, namely clauses 49 and 101, in a charter party contract (a deed between a shipowner and a trader for the hire of a ship and the delivery of cargo)(the “Contract”). The arbitration tribunal who had
BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY The application involves the interpretation of a lease agreement (“the lease agreement”) between Merchant West (Pty) Ltd (“the Applicant”) and Cell C (Pty) Ltd (“the Respondent”). The lease agreement was made up of a Master Rental Agreement (“the MRA”) concluded on 19 December 2013, a side letter dated 4 December 2013 and
BACKGROUND As part of a black empowerment initiative by the National Empowerment Fund (“NEF”), various franchise agreements were concluded between Sales Hire CC (“Sales Hire”) and four close corporations, the members of which were former employees of Sales Hire (“Lessees”). In addition, a cooperation agreement was entered into between Sales Hire and the NEF in
BACKGROUND On 11 October 2016, the applicant company (“the lessor”) concluded a written lease agreement (“the lease”) with the respondent (“the lessee”) in terms whereof the hotel and the property on which it is located were leased to it for a period of 20 years. By the end of 2016, the lessee began defaulting on