LL.M. (Commercial Law) / Applications for prohibitory injunctions or interdicts against payment under documentary credits are seldom awarded. However, both English and South African law provide alternative forms of relief. These alternative orders focus on how the beneficiary deals with the proceeds of the credit rather than the prevention of payment thereof. One such alternative is the Mareva injunction of English law which, through freezing the beneficiary’s assets, prevents the removal thereof from the area of the court’s jurisdiction once judgment is given. The South African equivalent of the Mareva injunction is known as the anti-dissipation interdict and has yet to be applied to the law of documentary credits by the South African courts. However the South African attachment application has been so applied. Therefore this dissertation seeks to conduct a comparative analysis between South African and English law Marevatype injunctions on the proceeds of documentary credits, focusing especially on the judgments handed down in Intraco Ltd v Notis Shipping Corporation of Liberia and Ex Parte Sapan Trading (Pty) Ltd. Chapters Two, Three and Four will explore the nature, development, requirements and effects of the injunctions and interdicts through local and international case law as well as the prospects of a successful application under each. Finally Chapter Five will critically analyse, comment and draw conclusions from Ex Parte Sapan Trading (Pty) Ltd.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:uj/uj:13740 |
| Date | 14 July 2015 |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
| Rights | University of Johannesburg |
Page generated in 0.0017 seconds