WHEN JOHN Bredenkamp left the hallowed chambers of the Court of Appeal in 2010, he must have been as flummoxed as all the people who heard the thud of the gavel as it pronounced the fate of his banking account.
He had a few options, none of which were easy and practicable. By now, arguably, he would either have long applied for and opened his own commercial bank or ever so hurriedly, departed from the planet of the ordinary. Worse still, bereft of other reasonable choices, have moved to Zimbabwe. His confusion, not limited to him alone, liberally spread and quickly reached a multitude of innocent others.
In its stride, the judgment fostered two broad strands of interpretation of the musings of the learned ones. They quickly ossified into two…
