Can a WhatsApp message really lead to a company’s liquidation? In a recent case, it did.
Over the past decade, WhatsApp has evolved from a casual messaging app to a central communication channel for both personal and professional interactions. Businesses now routinely use it to negotiate deals, confirm transactions, and manage relationships.
As observed in Gerritsen Trading v Blydskap Holdings (Pty) Ltd [2025], WhatsApp exchanges are not merely informal chatter; they can be decisive evidence in legal disputes. In that case, the court relied heavily on WhatsApp conversations to discern the parties’ true intentions, to establish the existence of a debt and ultimately grant a provisional liquidation order.
The judgment underlines that digital correspondence often provides a current and reliable record of commercial dealings and in many disputes, will be the most persuasive evidence available.
Background
Gerritsen Trading CC (Gerritsen) was contracted in February 2024 to drill three boreholes on Blydskap Holdings (Pty) Ltd’s (Blydskap) farm in the Sandveld region.
Gerritsen successfully completed the first two boreholes, but the third borehole encountered artesian pressure problems, forcing Gerritsen to stop drilling on 1 March 2024. Gerritsen issued several invoices for the work, and although Blydskap made partial payments, a substantial balance remained unpaid.
This led Gerritsen to launch a liquidation application in December 2024.
Lauren Salt and JJ van der Walt 4 Jul 2018 WhatsApp messages as key evidence
The court emphasised the evidentiary weight of WhatsApp messages, describing them as “an unfiltered contemporaneous record” and “the best evidence” when disputes turn on intention and liability.
Between April and November 2024, a series of WhatsApp messages exchanged between Reginald Rabie (Blydskap’s sole director) and Pierre Gerritsen set out a clear acknowledgement of debt and repeated promises to pay.
When read together, the court found that these messages undermine any later contention that the debt is disputed or conditional; they constitute current admissions of liability and repeated undertakings to pay, which were not honoured, prompting Gerritsen to institute liquidation proceedings against Blydskap Holdings.
Outcome
The court ultimately relied on the WhatsApp exchanges to conclude that, by October/November 2024, Blydskap could not pay its debts as they fell due. Those messages supported a finding that Blydskap could not meet its financial obligations in the ordinary course of business, indicative of commercial insolvency.
Cooke AJ concluded:
The admitted WhatsApp exchanges are decisive. They show that (a) Blydskap is indebted to Gerritsen Drilling, (b) it does not enjoy a genuine and reasonable defence, and (c) it is unable to pay its debts.
A provisional liquidation order was granted, with a return date set for 7 October 2025.
Danielle Giannico, Joshua van Wyk, and Nikita Lalla 30 Sep 2025 Key takeaways
Legal teams should take the following steps to mitigate risk and strengthen their position in potential disputes:
- Archive WhatsApp and other digital communications related to contracts, payments, and negotiations.
- Confirm key business decisions in writing, even if via messaging apps.
- Train staff to treat informal chats with the same care as formal correspondence.
- Establish internal protocols for documenting and preserving digital evidence.
- Review and update communication policies to reflect the evidentiary value of digital messages.
Businesses should treat informal chats with the same care as formal correspondence: what begins as casual messaging can become decisive evidence and decide the outcome of litigation.
