Blom and Another v Brown and Others ([2011] 3 All SA 223 (SCA)) [2011] ZASCA 54; 345/10 (31 March 2011)

Blom and Another v Brown and Others ([2011] 3 All SA 223 (SCA)) [2011] ZASCA 54; 345/10 (31 March 2011)

Section 4A(1) of the Wills Act establishes a general rule disqualifying persons who write out a will from benefitting under it. However, this disqualification is subject to exceptions in section 4A(2). Subsection (2)(a) empowers the court to declare such a person competent to inherit if satisfied that no fraud or undue influence occurred, while subsection (2)(b) automatically exempts family members who would have inherited under intestate succession, up to the value of their intestate share. The court found that the first respondent acted bona fide, at the deceased's request, and there was no evidence of fraud or undue influence. She gained no unfair advantage and her bona fides were not...

Citation
[2011] ZASCA 54
Parties
Appellant: Nadine Blom; Appellant: Elmari Brown; Respondent: Cecilia Getruida Brown; Respondent: Gert van Schalkwyk; Respondent: The Master of the High Court Pretoria
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 March 2011
Case Number
345/10
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From North Gauteng High Court (pretoria), Order of Ismail Aj; Leave to Appeal Granted; Appeal Heard and Judgment Delivered.
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Ponnan, Tshiqi, Seriti
Legal Topics
Wills Act Interpretation, Testamentary Disqualification, Intestate Succession, Executor Removal
Family and Children Land and Property Wills Act Interpretation Testamentary Disqualification Intestate Succession Executor Removal

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nadine Blom

Appellant

Elmari Brown

Appellant

Cecilia Getruida Brown

Respondent

Gert van Schalkwyk

Respondent

The Master of the High Court Pretoria

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From North Gauteng High Court (pretoria), Order of Ismail Aj; Leave to Appeal Granted; Appeal Heard and Judgment Delivered.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 4A of the Wills Act 7 of 1953 disqualifies the first respondent from inheriting under the will she wrote out for the deceased.
  2. 2 Whether the first respondent should be removed as executor of the deceased's estate under section 54(1)(a) of the Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965.

Ratio Decidendi

Section 4A(1) of the Wills Act establishes a general rule disqualifying persons who write out a will from benefitting under it. However, this disqualification is subject to exceptions in section 4A(2). Subsection (2)(a) empowers the court to declare such a person competent to inherit if satisfied that no fraud or undue influence occurred, while subsection (2)(b) automatically exempts family members who would have inherited under intestate succession, up to the value of their intestate share. The court found that the first respondent acted bona fide, at the deceased's request, and there was no evidence of fraud or undue influence. She gained no unfair advantage and her bona fides were not...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.