Lancelot Stellenbosch Mountain Retreat (Pty) Ltd v Gore NO and Others

Queensgate Wealth Manager (Pty) Ltd, the funding arm of the Queensgate Group, borrowed €2.35 million from AIK Credit PLC in April 2008. Part of those funds (R6 480 000) was on-lent to Black River Development (Pty) Ltd. In September 2008 Black River, Queensgate Wealth and Lancelot Stellenbosch Mountain Retreat (Pty) Ltd concluded an assignment and delegation agreement in terms of which Lancelot assumed Black River’s obligations to repay the R6 480 000 loan. The assignment took effect on 6 January 2009. Queensgate Wealth was liquidated, and its liquidators served a statutory demand under s 345(1)(a) of the Companies Act on Lancelot in April/May 2010. When the debt remained unpaid, the liquidators applied in May 2012 for Lancelot’s winding-up. Lancelot opposed the application, contending that the debt had prescribed, arguing that it became due on 17 October 2008, being the due date of the AIK loan.

The appeal was dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel. The final liquidation order against the appellant remained in force.

The case clarifies the onus in prescription disputes, reaffirming that a debtor who raises prescription must allege and prove when the debt became due. It underscores the requirement for precise pleading and evidence in motion proceedings, particularly where prescription is relied upon to defeat a creditor’s locus standi in liquidation proceedings. The judgment is frequently cited on the evidentiary burden relating to prescription.