PRESCRIPTION AND THE HSAG CLAIMS
The attorneys of record on behalf of the HSAG have received requests from HSAG investors to explain prescription in simple terms and the effect that it may have on the claims of investors who invested in the HS 15 – 22 companies.
Herewith a short summary:
Prescription is when a claim/debt (i.e. obligation to pay money) is extinguished by law after a period of time. In terms of the Prescription Act 68 of 1969, prescription begins to run as soon as a debt becomes due or when the creditor knew or reasonably should have known the identity of the debtor and the facts given rise to the debt.
In South African law, the Prescription Act states that contractual and delictual claims/debts prescribe after three years from the date when the debt became due and payable (i.e. when the cause of action arose).
WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES OF A CLAIM/DEBT THAT PRESCRIBED?
When a claim has prescribed, the party with the claim may not institute legal action for such claim.
Thus, the debt becomes extinguished after the three-year lapse and the debtor will not be liable to pay such debt.
WHEN WILL A PRESCRIPTION PERIOD BE INTERRUPTED?
In terms of S13 of the Prescription Act there are circumstances that can delay or interrupt the running of prescription.
Issuing of a summons served by the Plaintiff on the Defendant, or in the case of an obligation to pay money, an acknowledgment of debt by a debtor are just some examples of things which will cause prescription to be interrupted.
THE HSAG AND PRESCRIPTION
A court application for leave to institute a class action was issued on behalf of investors in Highveld Syndications 19 to 22 in the Pretoria High Court in October 2014 under case number 80811/14.
Fortunately, the issuing of such application has interrupted the running of prescription in respect of all the class action claims as referred to in such application, including the claims based on the so-called buy back agreements.
That prescription is interrupted by means of the mere issuing of such class action application, was stated by the Supreme Court of Appeal in the matter of Children’s Resource Centre Trust v Pioneer Food (Pty) Ltd 2013 (2) SA 213 (SCA) ( ZASCA 182) at paragraph 89 of the judgment.
The second Court Application in respect of HSAG investors in Highveld Syndications 15 to18 is underway and scheduled to be issued during the course of 2018. With the information at our disposal, there is no risk of prescription of the claims of investors who invested in these four syndications.
VERJARING EN HSAG EISE
Die prokureurs van rekord namens die HSAG het versoeke van HSAG-beleggers ontvang om die verjaring in eenvoudige terme te verduidelik en die effek wat dit mag hê op die eise van beleggers wat in die HS 15-22-maatskappye belê het.
Hiermee ‘n kort opsomming:
WAT BETEKEN VERJARING?
Verjaring is wanneer ‘n eis / skuld (dws verpligting om geld te betaal) na ‘n tydperk deur die wet uitgewis word. Ingevolge die Verjaringswet 68 van 1969 begin die verjaring sodra ‘n skuld verskuldig is of wanneer die skuldeiser geweet of redelikerwys die identiteit van die skuldenaar moes ken en die feite wat aan die skuld gelei het, sou ken.
In die Suid-Afrikaanse wet bepaal die Verjaringswet dat kontraktuele en deliktuele eise / skuld verjaar na drie jaar vanaf die datum waarop die skuld verskuldig en betaalbaar geword het (dws wanneer die aksiesaak ontstaan ​​het).
WAT IS DIE GEVOLGE VAN ‘N EIS / SKULD WAT VERJAAR HET?
Wanneer ‘n eis verjaar het, mag die party met die eis nie regstappe instel vir so ‘n eis nie.
So word die skuld na die drie jaar verval en die skuldenaar sal nie aanspreeklik wees om sulke skuld te betaal nie.
WANNEER SAL ‘N VERJARINGS PERIODE ONDERBREEK WORD?
Ingevolge S13 van die Verjaringswet is daar omstandighede wat die verjaring kan vertraag of onderbreek.
Uitreiking van ‘n dagvaarding wat deur die Eiser aan die Verweerder gedien word, of in die geval van ‘n verpligting om geld te betaal, ‘n skuldbinding deur ‘n skuldenaar is slegs ‘n paar voorbeelde van dinge wat die verjaring sal onderbreek.
Die HSAG EN VERJARING
‘N Hofaansoek om verlof om ‘n klasaksie in te stel is in Oktober 2014 onder die hofnommer 80811/14 namens beleggers in Highveld Syndications 19-22 in die Pretoriase hooggeregshof uitgereik.
Gelukkig het die uitreiking van so ‘n aansoek die verjaring voorgeloop ten opsigte van al die klasaksie-eise soos in die aansoek genoem, insluitende die eise gebaseer op die sogenaamde terugkoopooreenkomste.
Die verjaring word onderbreek deur die blote uitreiking van so ‘n klasaksie-aansoek, deur die Hoogste Hof van Appèl in die saak van Kindersorgsentrum Trust v Pioneer Food (Edms) Bpk 2013 (2) SA 213 (SCA) ([ 2012] ZASCA 182) by paragraaf 89 van die vonnis.
Die tweede hofaansoek ten opsigte van HSAG-beleggers in Highveld Syndikasies 15 tot 18 is aan die gang en sal in die loop van 2018 uitgereik word. Met die inligting tot ons beskikking is daar geen risiko vir die verjaring van die eise van beleggers wat in hierdie vier sindikate belê het nie.
The HSAG appreciates everybody who took the time to complete the latest HSAG Survey. The HSAG Survey is an important tool used by the HSAG to establish its members’ opinions from time to time.
Here are some of the latest results:
99.44% of HSAG Members believe that justice for the HS Investors will only be served through legal action (a Court of Law).
82.86% of HSAG Members believe that Mr Nic Georgiou will not honour a commercial settlement.
96.05% of HSAG Members says that the HSAG should continue to claim 100% of investors’ capital as well as interest.
91.48% of HSAG Members know that if you’re not registered with the HSAG, there is a risk that your claim for HS 19-22 and on the buy-back agreements may be dismissed by the Court because it prescribed.
Th HSAG wishes to stress that it is of utmost importance that HSAG members stay committed to the HSAG Class Action in order for the HSAG to continue its path towards justice for all the HSAG Members.
DECEMBER / DESEMBER 2017