About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
You are here:
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
>>
2026
>>
[2026] ZAGPJHC 425
|
Noteup
|
LawCite
Black Mountain Investment Management (Pty) Ltd and Others v Sunstone Capital Limited and Another (094421/2024) [2026] ZAGPJHC 425 (9 April 2026)
Download original files
PDF format
RTF format
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION, HELD AT
JOHANNESBURG
CASE
NO
: 094421/2024
DATE
:
09.04.2026
(1)
REPORTABLE: NO
(2)
OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES : NO
(3)
REVISED
In the matter between
BLACK
MOUNTAIN INVESTMENT
MANAGEMENT
(PTY) LTD
First Applicant
MOHAMED
SHAZIM ISMAIL DHORAT
Second Applicant
BLACK
MOUNTAIN IM (PTY) LTD
Third Applicant
and
SUNSTONE CAPITAL
LIMITED
First Respondent
SUNSTONE MANAGEMENT CO
(PTY) LTD Second Respondent
JUDGMENT
YACOOB,
J
:
The
applicants for leave seek leave to appeal the judgment given against
them only on one ground, that is, that the order ordered
the three
Black Mountain entities, who were the respondents in the main
application, to make payment to the applicants in the main
application jointly and severally.
The
contention is that the third applicant for leave was nominated to
take over all the obligations of the first applicant, and
therefore
that no order ought to have been made against the first applicant.
Having
looked at the papers again and considered the arguments made, I am
satisfied that the put option agreement does not contemplate
the
unilateral nomination of a third party to bear the obligation to make
payment, and that, when the nomination was effected,
it only dealt
with who would be receiving the shares and not who would be making
the payment.
In my
view, the fact that the exercise of the put option was addressed to
the third applicant and not the first does not change
this, and I
agree with Mr Cook's submissions that any such delegation of an
obligation had to be explicit and had to be accepted.
For these
reasons, I am not satisfied that another court would come to a
different decision and the application for leave to appeal
is
dismissed with costs.
YACOOB, J
JUDGE OF THE HIGH
COURT
DATE
:
…………………
TRANSCRIBER’S
CERTIFICATE
I,
the undersigned, hereby certify that
so far as it is audible to
me
, the aforegoing is a true and correct transcript of the
proceedings recorded by means of a digital recorder in the matter
between:
BLACK
MOUNTAIN INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT & OTHERS
//
SUNSTONE CAPITAL & ANOTHER
CASE
NUMBER
: 094421/2024
RECORDED
AT
: johannesburg
DATE
HELD
: 09.04.2026
NUMBER OF
pages
:
2
PROBLEMS
EXPERIENCED WITH RECORDING
DATE
COMPLETED
20.04.2026
TRANSCRIBER
:
FY
AUCAMP