MRL3701 Assignment 1 Semester 2 - 2023
Epstein v Epstein 1987 (4) SA 606 (C)
Pretorius’ Trustee v Van Blommenstein 1949 (1) SA 267 (O)
Magnum Financial Holdings (PTY) Ltd (In Litigation) v Summerly and
Another NNO 1984 (1) SA 160 (W)
Prinsloo en ‘n Ander v Van Zyl NO 1967 (1) SA 581 (T)
1. Case name: Estate Wege v Strauss 2932 AD 76
2. Ratio decidendi of the case: Although a betting transaction was an invalid
agreement and thus unenforceable in a court of law, payment of such a wavering
debt was not a disposition without value.
3. Area of Insolvency Law applicable: Section 26 Insolvency Act 24 of 1936
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller GetItRight. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $9.10. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.