Take & Save Trading CC and Others v The Standard Bank of South Africa Limited

Standard Bank sued Take & Save Trading CC for approximately R10 million arising from an overdraft, and cited the other appellants as sureties, with additional claims against Ahmed Yacoob Mansoor under ss 64 and 65 of the Close Corporations Act 69 of 1984. Mansoor, the sole member of the close corporation, deposited cheques drawn on a Nedbank account into the CC’s account and immediately transferred nearly R10 million electronically to a third-party supplier for cigarettes. The cheques were dishonoured for lack of funds. Mansoor then instructed Standard Bank to reverse the electronic transfers, which the bank did not complete. During trial, after judicial questioning and adverse provisional views expressed on aspects of the defence, the appellants’ legal representatives withdrew. A postponement was granted. When the matter resumed, the appellants applied for the trial judge’s recusal on the basis of reasonable apprehension of bias arising from remarks and conduct during the postponement debate. The recusal application and leave to appeal were refused, but the Supreme Court of Appeal granted leave.

The appeal against the refusal of the recusal application was dismissed with costs.

The case is significant for clarifying South African law on judicial recusal during the course of proceedings, particularly where alleged bias is based on the judge’s conduct and comments in managing a trial. It underscores that active judicial case management and expression of provisional views do not, without more, give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias, and that mid-trial appeals against refusals to recuse should generally be avoided.