Setting aside Transactions from Pyramid Schemes as Impeachable Dispositions under South African Insolvency Legislation

South African courts have experienced a rise in the number of cases involving schemes that promise a return on investment with interest rates which are considerably above the maximum amount allowed by law, or schemes which promise compensation from the active recruitment of participants. These schem...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Zingapi Mabe
Format: Article
Language:Afrikaans
Published: North-West University 2016-10-01
Series:Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:http://journals.assaf.org.za/per/article/view/1236/1292
id doaj-1f9347a87ad94cf69cb9dbc90bbc8778
record_format Article
spelling doaj-1f9347a87ad94cf69cb9dbc90bbc87782020-11-25T03:31:57ZafrNorth-West UniversityPotchefstroom Electronic Law Journal1727-37812016-10-0119124http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2016/v19n0a1236Setting aside Transactions from Pyramid Schemes as Impeachable Dispositions under South African Insolvency LegislationZingapi Mabe0University of South AfricaSouth African courts have experienced a rise in the number of cases involving schemes that promise a return on investment with interest rates which are considerably above the maximum amount allowed by law, or schemes which promise compensation from the active recruitment of participants. These schemes, which are often referred to as pyramid or Ponzi schemes, are unsustainable operations and give rise to problems in the law of insolvency. Investors in these schemes are often left empty-handed upon the scheme’s eventual collapse and insolvency. Investors who received pay-outs from the scheme find themselves in the defence against the trustee’s claims for the return of the pay-outs to the insolvent estate. As the schemes are illegal and the pay-outs are often in terms of void agreements, the question arises whether they can be returned to the insolvent estate. A similar situation arose in Griffiths v Janse van Rensburg 2015 ZASCA 158 (26 October 2015). The point of contention in this case was whether the illegality of the business of the scheme was a relevant consideration in determining whether the pay-outs were made in the ordinary course of business of the scheme. This paper discusses pyramid schemes in the context of impeachable dispositions in terms of the Insolvency Act 24 of 1936.http://journals.assaf.org.za/per/article/view/1236/1292Insolvency lawpyramid schemesimpeachable dispositionssetting transactions aside
collection DOAJ
language Afrikaans
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Zingapi Mabe
spellingShingle Zingapi Mabe
Setting aside Transactions from Pyramid Schemes as Impeachable Dispositions under South African Insolvency Legislation
Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal
Insolvency law
pyramid schemes
impeachable dispositions
setting transactions aside
author_facet Zingapi Mabe
author_sort Zingapi Mabe
title Setting aside Transactions from Pyramid Schemes as Impeachable Dispositions under South African Insolvency Legislation
title_short Setting aside Transactions from Pyramid Schemes as Impeachable Dispositions under South African Insolvency Legislation
title_full Setting aside Transactions from Pyramid Schemes as Impeachable Dispositions under South African Insolvency Legislation
title_fullStr Setting aside Transactions from Pyramid Schemes as Impeachable Dispositions under South African Insolvency Legislation
title_full_unstemmed Setting aside Transactions from Pyramid Schemes as Impeachable Dispositions under South African Insolvency Legislation
title_sort setting aside transactions from pyramid schemes as impeachable dispositions under south african insolvency legislation
publisher North-West University
series Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal
issn 1727-3781
publishDate 2016-10-01
description South African courts have experienced a rise in the number of cases involving schemes that promise a return on investment with interest rates which are considerably above the maximum amount allowed by law, or schemes which promise compensation from the active recruitment of participants. These schemes, which are often referred to as pyramid or Ponzi schemes, are unsustainable operations and give rise to problems in the law of insolvency. Investors in these schemes are often left empty-handed upon the scheme’s eventual collapse and insolvency. Investors who received pay-outs from the scheme find themselves in the defence against the trustee’s claims for the return of the pay-outs to the insolvent estate. As the schemes are illegal and the pay-outs are often in terms of void agreements, the question arises whether they can be returned to the insolvent estate. A similar situation arose in Griffiths v Janse van Rensburg 2015 ZASCA 158 (26 October 2015). The point of contention in this case was whether the illegality of the business of the scheme was a relevant consideration in determining whether the pay-outs were made in the ordinary course of business of the scheme. This paper discusses pyramid schemes in the context of impeachable dispositions in terms of the Insolvency Act 24 of 1936.
topic Insolvency law
pyramid schemes
impeachable dispositions
setting transactions aside
url http://journals.assaf.org.za/per/article/view/1236/1292
work_keys_str_mv AT zingapimabe settingasidetransactionsfrompyramidschemesasimpeachabledispositionsundersouthafricaninsolvencylegislation
_version_ 1724570630297223168