C M v E M (1086/2018) [2020] ZASCA 48; [2020] 3 All SA 1 (SCA); 2020 (5) SA 49 (SCA) (5 May 2020)

C M v E M (1086/2018) [2020] ZASCA 48; [2020] 3 All SA 1 (SCA); 2020 (5) SA 49 (SCA) (5 May 2020)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that while the capital underlying the respondent's living annuities is owned by the insurer and not accessible to the annuitant, the respondent's right to future annuity payments constitutes an asset in his estate for purposes of accrual calculation upon divorce. The court rejected the argument that the annuities are 'trust property' under the Financial Institutions Act, finding no fiduciary relationship or statutory indication to that effect. The court distinguished Commissioner, South African Revenue Service v Higgo as dealing with a different type of annuity contract. The trial court misdirected itself by relying on expert evidence for legal...

Citation
[2020] ZASCA 48
Parties
Applicant: C M; Respondent: E M
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 May 2020
Case Number
1086/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal and Appeal
Outcome
Application for special leave to appeal granted; appeal upheld; order of the Full Court set aside and replaced; matter remitted for valuation of respondent's right to future annuity payments.
Judges
Maya, Wallis, Mokgohloa, Dlodlo, Eksteen
Legal Topics
Accrual System, Living Annuity, Divorce Act, Matrimonial Property, Valuation of Annuity Rights, Trust Property
Family and Children Civil Procedure Banking and Finance Accrual System Living Annuity Divorce Act Matrimonial Property Valuation of Annuity Rights +1 more

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C M

Applicant

E M

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal and Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's right to future annuity payments under living annuities constitutes an asset in his estate for accrual calculation upon divorce.
  2. 2 Whether the ownership of the capital underlying the living annuities vests in the insurer or the annuitant.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's living annuities are 'trust property' under the Financial Institutions (Protection of Funds) Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that while the capital underlying the respondent's living annuities is owned by the insurer and not accessible to the annuitant, the respondent's right to future annuity payments constitutes an asset in his estate for purposes of accrual calculation upon divorce. The court rejected the argument that the annuities are 'trust property' under the Financial Institutions Act, finding no fiduciary relationship or statutory indication to that effect. The court distinguished Commissioner, South African Revenue Service v Higgo as dealing with a different type of annuity contract. The trial court misdirected itself by relying on expert evidence for legal...

Court Disposition

Application for special leave to appeal granted; appeal upheld; order of the Full Court set aside and replaced; matter remitted for valuation of respondent's right to future annuity payments.

Orders

  • The application for special leave to appeal is granted and the appeal is upheld with costs.
  • The order of the Full Court of the Gauteng Division, Johannesburg is set aside and replaced with an order upholding the appeal with costs.