Moraitis Investments (Pty) Ltd v Montic Dairy (Pty) Ltd and Others

The dispute arose from long‑running commercial litigation between business partners Apostolos Moraitis and Karl Kebert, conducted through various companies and family trusts. After years of litigation concerning liquidation, valuation of shares, and a separate claim relating to a hotel in Greece, the parties entered into a comprehensive settlement agreement in September 2013. The agreement settled all pending litigation and was made an order of court. It was signed only by Moraitis and Kebert, each warranting authority to act for their respective trusts and companies. After partial implementation, Moraitis Investments and the Moraitis Trust sought to set aside both the settlement agreement and the court order, alleging that Moraitis lacked authority to conclude the settlement on their behalf and that the agreement contravened sections 75, 112 and 115 of the Companies Act 71 of 2008.

The appeal was dismissed with costs, and the consent order making the settlement agreement an order of court remained in force.

The case is significant for reaffirming the finality and binding nature of consent orders in South African law. It clarifies that courts must approach challenges from the perspective of rescission of the court order, not merely contractual invalidity, and confirms the narrow grounds upon which consent judgments may be set aside. The judgment also underscores the onus on parties alleging lack of authority and reinforces respect for court orders in line with constitutional principles.