Skip to main content

Are you facing financial difficulty? Find out here how a sequestration can benefit you!

Are you having sleepless nights worrying about how you will be able to make payment to your creditors? Are you avoiding answering your phone for fear of speaking to loan sharks, debt collectors, or maybe even the sheriff?  Not able to concentrate on earning an income or moving forward with your life because of financial restraints? Read this article to find out if sequestration is an option for you.   
Broadly speaking, being “insolvent” means that your liabilities exceed your assets.  Should you find yourself in this unfortunate situation, you can make an application to the high court, with the necessary jurisdiction, for the voluntary surrender of your estate, provided that you meet certain requirements:  You need to have enough realisable assets (or cash) to pay the administration costs in respect of your sequestration and at least 20 cents in the Rand to defray creditors.
If the court is satisfied that:
1.              there are enough funds in your estate to cover the administration costs;
2.              the sequestration will be to the benefit of your creditors;  and
3.              you are indeed insolvent;
the court may grant a sequestration order.  The latter is a formal declaration that a debtor – the Applicant - is insolvent.  
Having been declared insolvent entails that the insolvent’s estate, consisting of assets and liabilities, be placed in the hands of a trustee.  The trustee will then administer the insolvent’s estate by reducing all the assets to cash and by distributing the proceeds amongst the insolvent’s creditors (in order of preference). 
What happens if there are not enough funds to pay the creditors?
Not all your creditors, as listed in your application for voluntary surrender, will necessarily lodge a claim against your (insolvent) estate and consequently, if they do not lodge a claim, they will not be paid by your trustee.  Here it is necessary to differentiate between the different types of creditors.   There are three types of creditors:
1.              Preferential creditors – these are creditors who are entitled to get paid before other creditors. For example, South African Revenue Services;
2.              Secured creditors – these are creditors whose claims are secured by means of a bond, a tacit hypothec, pledge or lien.  They are second in line to get paid by the trustee, after preferential creditors. For example, bondholder.
3.              Concurrent creditors – these are creditors who are not preferential or secured and they stand last in the line of getting paid by the trustee. For example, credit cards, personal loans, etc.
If there is a shortfall in your estate, in other words; not enough funds to pay the administrative costs of your voluntary surrender then, and in that event, the proven concurrent creditors will need to each make a payment towards the insolvent estate in respect of the administration costs.  This may very well be the reason why concurrent creditors will think twice before they lodge a claim against an insolvent estate.
For an in-depth discussion on sequestration contact our office for a consultation.
Written by Talita Erasmus Рa practising attorney at Alan Jos̩ Incorporated.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Partners in a permanent life partnership could now enjoy the same benefits as spouses when it comes to intestate succession.

  The High Court in Cape Town recently decided a matter where a surviving partner, in a permanent life partnership, sought to declare certain sections of the Intestate Succession Act 18 of 1987 and Maintenance of Surviving Spouses Act 27 1990 unconstitutional.   In Bwanya v Master of the High Court and others 2020 (12) BCLR 1446 (WCC) the Applicant alleged that she and the deceased had been partners in a permanent opposite-sex life partnership, with the same or similar characteristics as a marriage, in which they had undertaken reciprocal duties of support and had committed themselves to marrying each other.  The deceased passed without leaving a valid will. The Applicant accordingly claimed against the estate and sought to be recognized as an heir in terms of the Intestate Succession Act. She further also sought maintenance from the estate in terms of the Maintenance of Surviving Spouses Act.   The executor rejected the Applicants claims on the basis that the aforementioned acts does

Maintenance: Who is legally liable to maintain who?

According to South Africa law, particularly the common law, both parents (whether in a relationship or not) are obligated to financially support their children.   While this article will only discuss the maintenance of children, it is also important to note that other parties may be legally liable to pay maintenance. In some instances, grandparents are legally liable to maintain their grandchildren if their children, that is to say the grandchildren’s parents, are unable to maintain the grandchildren. Again, this is only if the grandparents are financially able to maintain their grandchildren.   Husbands and wives are also legally liable to maintain each other whilst they are married and, if the divorce court makes an order for spousal maintenance then there will also be a legal obligation to maintain an ex-spouse after the divorce.   Lastly, children may be liable to maintain their parents. This is only if the parents can prove that they are in need of maintenance and that the child o

THE EFFECT OF YOUR MARITAL REGIME ON TRANSACTIONS WITH THIRD PARTIES

Court cases discussed in this article: -        Broodie N.O. v Maposa and Others 2018 (3) SA 129 (WCC) [The court of first instance] & -        Marais N.O. and Another v Maposa and Others (642/2018) [2020] zasca 23 (25 March 2020)   [The court of Appeal] When entering into any form of a financial transaction with someone who is married in community of property, that person’s spouse’s consent may also be required for the business contract to be valid, binding and enforceable.  But what does this mean and is there a legal duty to investigate as to what the marital status of the other person is?    These questions were asked and answered in the above-mentioned two court cases. In this article I will explain what the respective Judges decided on these issues. Broodie N.O. v Maposa and Others The facts: Mrs Broodie married Mr Broodie in 1967 in community of property.  The marriage was a civil one in terms of the then Black Administration Act, 38 of 192