• +264 813814414
  • info@consultfasz.com

Puma Energy NamTwo (Pty) Ltd v NABTA NAHCMD (18 January 2023)


The plaintiff instituted action against the first and second defendants for ejectment. The plaintiff’s cause of action was that of vindication as it claimed to be the owner of the property. The cause of action was related to a cancelled contract of a franchise agreement entered into on 9 March 1995, and terminated on 31 October 1997. A copy of the “agreement”, an internal approval of Caltex Dealer Proposition, was attached to the particulars of claim. The defendant claims that . . .

Dear user, unfortunately you are not allowed to view this restricted content.
Please Login or Register in order to view.

error: Content is protected !!