SA Corporate Real Estate Limited and Indluplace Properties Limited
SA Corporate Real Estate Limited and Indluplace Properties Limited
CDH advised SA Corporate Real Estate Limited and Indluplace Properties Limited on the acquisition by SA Corporate and delisting of Indluplace Properties Limited. Click
CDH's Corporate & Commercial and Competition Law Practices advised SA Corporate Real Estate Limited and Indluplace Properties Limited in relation to SA Corporate's acquisition, and subsequent delisting, of Indluplace Properties Limited. The transaction will enhance SA Corporate's exposure to the residential sector and result in SA Corporate acquiring an Indluplace portfolio which it views as complementary to its own quality residential rental portfolio held within Afhco Holdings Proprietary Limited.
You might also be interested in
13 Sep 2023
by Belinda Scriba and Loyiso Bavuma
Evolving power dynamics between a board and business rescue practitioners: It’s a balancing act
As a result of the decision from the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) in the case of Tayob and Another v Shiva Uranium (Pty) Ltd and Others ZASCA there have been, and will continue to be, burning questions surrounding which powers shift from the board to the business rescue practitioners (BRPs) once a company has been placed under business rescue supervision. In the Shiva case, the court found that certain administrative powers were retained by the board. For more on the Shiva case see our articles here and here .
Business Rescue, Restructuring & Insolvency
7 min read
18 Jul 2023
by Natasha Fletcher and Zahra Karolia
Fraudulent non-disclosure and misrepresentation of property defects in sale render seller liable
Latent defects are flaws in a property that could not have been identified despite a reasonable inspection prior to the sale. In terms of common law, the purchaser will have a right of recourse after the sale if the seller was aware of latent defects and fraudulently did not disclose the defects to the purchaser.
Real Estate Law
3 min read
10 Jul 2023
by Imraan Mahomed and Thato Makoaba
Cannabis in the workplace: Clearing the air
In 2018 the Constitutional Court handed down the landmark judgment of Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Others v Prince (6) SA 393 (CC), which legalised the private use and possession of cannabis. Concerns about the effect of the judgment in the workplace were ameliorated with an interpretation of the law, mostly in arbitration awards, which found that employers remain empowered to set workplace policies regulating substance abuse, including the use of cannabis. This position was recently confirmed in the 27 June 2023 Labour Court judgment of Marasi v Petroleum Oil and Gas Corporation of South Africa (C219/2020) ZALCCT 34.
Employment Law
3 min read
21 Aug 2023
by Lydia Owuor
CDH extends a warm welcome to Lydia Owuor, our latest Partner addition in Nairobi
Lydia joins us as a distinguished advocate and seasoned commercial real estate professional, bringing with her a wealth of expertise and accomplishments.
Firm News
2 min read
8 Apr 2024
by Imraan Mahomed and Alysa Bunting
Are employers that hire equipment and machinery in the civil industry covered by the Bargaining Council for the Civil Engineering Industry?
The world of civil engineering and its scope of work is vast and varied. This is because it encompasses everything from construction and infrastructure projects to land and sea defence works. The complexity of the industry in the world of employment law often leads to interpretation disputes over demarcation with reference to the specific nature of work being carried out byemployers.
Employment Law
2 min read
25 Apr 2024
by Thandiwe Nhlapho
No blissful ignorance for non-compliance: The Turquand rule and section 20(7) in the context of special resolutions and fundamental transactions
The Turquand rule has been discussed and fairly applied in the South African jurisprudence. However, an interesting question remains as to whether the Turquand rule or section 20(7) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 (Companies Act) can be used to compel a party to implement a transaction where the party has not complied with the applicable provisions of the Companies Act requiring a special resolution of shareholders for the disposal of all or a greater part of the company’s assets or undertaking, amalgamation or merger, or a scheme of arrangement (fundamental transactions). The jurisprudence has adopted the take-no-prisoners approach sofar.
Corporate & Commercial Law
4 min read