Absa Bank Limited v White N.O and Another (M19/15) [2015] ZANWHC 57 (17 September 2015)
- Citation
- [2015] ZANWHC 57
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- North West High Court, Mafikeng
- Panel
- Landman
- Case number
- M19/15
More details
- Court
- North West High Court, Mafikeng
- Panel
- Landman
- Case number
- M19/15
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court held that the applicant is entitled to payment of the claimed sum and interest from the estate of the late Matthew Gilliand White, and that the mortgaged property may be declared specially executable and sold in execution under section 30 of the Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965 due to the delay in finalizing the estate. The applicant is not obliged to lodge a claim with the executrix and executor and may resort to litigation, as confirmed by the Supreme Court of Appeal in Nedbank Ltd v Steyn. Costs are awarded on an attorney and client scale as stipulated in the mortgage bond.
Court disposition
Application granted. The draft order marked 'AAL' is made an order of court.
Orders
- The applicant is granted payment of R490,526.30 and interest from the estate of the late Matthew Gilliand White.
- The immovable property serving as security for the loan is declared specially executable.
- A warrant of attachment is to be issued and the Sheriff is directed to sell the immovable property in execution under section 30 of the Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965.
- Costs are awarded on an attorney and client scale.
02
Material facts
Parties
Absa Bank Limited
Applicant Counsel: Adv ScholtzMathilda Cathleen White N.O.
RespondentMatthew Charles Gilliand White N.O.
RespondentAmounts and remedies
- Principal Debt Claimed: ZAR 490,526.3
03
Procedural history
Posture
Civil Application / First Instance
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the applicant is entitled to payment of the claimed sum from the estate of the late Matthew Gilliand White.
- 02
Whether the applicant may proceed by litigation rather than lodging a claim with the executrix and executor.
- 03
Whether the immovable property may be declared specially executable and sold in execution under section 30 of the Administration of Estates Act.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant argued that it is entitled to payment of R490,526.30 and interest from the estate, and to have the mortgaged property declared specially executable and sold in execution due to delay in finalizing the estate. The applicant submitted that it is not obliged to lodge a claim with the executrix and executor but may resort to litigation, relying on Nedbank Ltd v Steyn.
- Respondent
- The application was not opposed. No arguments were submitted by the respondents.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Nedbank Ltd v Steyn (20085/2014) [2015] ZASCA 30 (25 March 2015)
A creditor is entitled to proceed by litigation against an estate and is not obliged to lodge a claim with the executrix and executor.
- 02
Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965
Sale in execution of immovable property may be authorized under section 30 of the Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965 where there is delay in finalizing the estate.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court held that the applicant is entitled to payment of the claimed sum and interest from the estate of the late Matthew Gilliand White, and that the mortgaged property may be declared specially executable and sold in execution under section 30 of the Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965 due to the delay in finalizing the estate. The applicant is not obliged to lodge a claim with the executrix and executor and may resort to litigation, as confirmed by the Supreme Court of Appeal in Nedbank Ltd v Steyn. Costs are awarded on an attorney and client scale as stipulated in the mortgage bond.
Obiter and limits
- The mortgage bond stipulates liability for costs on an attorney and client scale, which the court enforces.
- The application was unopposed, and the court relied on the applicant's submissions and supporting authority.
Court disposition
Application granted. The draft order marked 'AAL' is made an order of court.
- The applicant is granted payment of R490,526.30 and interest from the estate of the late Matthew Gilliand White.
- The immovable property serving as security for the loan is declared specially executable.
- A warrant of attachment is to be issued and the Sheriff is directed to sell the immovable property in execution under section 30 of the Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965.
- Costs are awarded on an attorney and client scale.
Source and reliance status
North West High Court, Mafikeng
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Judgment
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(NORTH WEST DIVISION, MAHIKENG)
CASE NO.: M 19/15
In the matter between:
ABSA
BANK LIMITED
APPLICANT
and
MATHILDA CATHLEEN WHITE N.O
1ST RESPONDENT
duty appointed EXECUTRIX in the ESTATE
OF THE LATE MATTHEW GILLIAND WHITE and
MATHILDA
CATHLEEN WHITE
In terms of Section 13 and 14 of the Administration
of Estates Act 66 of 1965 (as amended)
MATTHEW CHARLES GILLIAND WHITE N.O
2ND RESPONDENT
duly appointed EXECUTOR in the ESTATE
In terms of Section 13 and14 of the Administration
of Estate Act 66 of 1965 (as amended)
JUDGMENT
Landman J:
[1] ABSA Bank Ltd, the applicant, applies on notice of motion against Mathilda Cathleen White NO and Matthews Charles Gilliand White NO, the executrix and executor of the estate of the late Matthew Gilliand White, the first and second respondents, for payment of the sum of R490 526,30 and interest as well as an order declaring the immovable property being security for the loan, to be declared especially executable that a warrant of attachment be issued and that the Sheriff be directed in terms of section 30 of the Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965 to sell in execution the immovable property. The applicant also seeks costs on an attorney and client scale.
[2] The application was not opposed. I enquired from Mr Scholtz, who appeared on behalf the applicant, whether the applicant was not obliged to lodge a claim for payment with the executrix and executor of the estate. Mr Scholtz submitted that the applicants are entitled to do so, but they were also entitled to resort to litigation. Mr Scholtz kindly supplied me with a copy of the judgment of the Supreme Court of Appeal in Nedbank Ltd v Steyn (20085/2014) [2015] ZASCA 30 (25 March 2015) which held this to be the case.
[3] This is a case where the sale in execution should be authorized in terms of section 30 of the Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965 in view of the delay by the respondents in finalizing the estate.
[4] The mortgage bond stipulated that the deceased (and thereby his estate) is liable for costs on an attorney and client scale.
Order
[5] I make the following order:
1. The draft order marked “AAL” is made an order of court.
AA Landman
Judge of the High Court
APPEARANCES:
Date of hearing:
10 September 2015
Date of Judgment:
17 September 2015
Counsel for the Applicant:
Adv Scholtz
Instructed by:
D C Kruger Attorneys
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.