C.F v M.F and Others (26446/2015) [2022] ZAGPPHC 644 (2 September 2022)

C.F v M.F and Others (26446/2015) [2022] ZAGPPHC 644 (2 September 2022)

The court held that the applicant need only establish a direct and substantial interest for the entities to be joined, not prove the merits of her claims at this stage. The applicant's allegations regarding the trust and companies, if accepted as true, are sufficient to meet the legal requirements for joinder. The court emphasized that the merits of the relief sought against the trust and companies are to be determined at trial, not during the joinder application. The opposition's argument conflating the joinder test with the merits was rejected, and the jurisprudence consistently supports the approach that the applicant's allegations are assumed true for joinder purposes. The court...

Citation
[2022] ZAGPPHC 644
Parties
Applicant: C[...] G[...] F[...]; Respondent: M[...] F[...]; Respondent: M[...] F[...] NO TRUSTEE OF THE F[...] BUSINESS TRUST; Respondent: BUSINESS TRUST; Respondent: J[...] J[...] F[...] NO TRUSTEE OF THE F[...] BUSINESS TRUST; Respondent: RAMREF MANAGEMENT AND HOLDINGS (PTY) LTD; Respondent: FERMAR (PTY) LTD; Respondent: KAMEELDORING VLAKTE BOERDERY (PTY) LTD; Respondent: SCHWEIZER ABATTOIR (PTY) LTD; Respondent: DRIVEN DIESEL ENTERPRISES (PTY) LTD; Respondent: FERMAR CAPE TOWN (PTY) LTD; Respondent: SABLE GRANITE (PTY) LTD; Respondent: BHEJANE MINING AND CRUSHING (PTY) LTD; Respondent: BHEJANE GRANITE (PTY) LTD; Respondent: MAXON SECURITY SERVICES (PTY) LTD; Respondent: R & M RANCH (PTY) LTD; Respondent: LEGAD (PTY) LTD; Respondent: AFROPULSE 177 (PTY) LTD; Respondent: NORTHERN SPARK TRADING (PTY) LTD; Respondent: SILVER SNAKES TRADING (PTY) LTD; Respondent: BIG CEDAR TRADING 89 (PTY) LTD; Respondent: HIGHLAND GATE BOERDERY (PTY) LTD; Respondent: GVDM COLLECTIONS (PTY) LTD; Respondent: EV PROPERTY HOLDINGS (PTY) LTD; Respondent: BLOEMFONTEIN EV PROPERTIES (PTY) LTD; Respondent: LOWVELD SPORTS INITIATIVE (PTY) LTD; Respondent: J[...] J[...] F[...]; Respondent: THE MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 September 2022
Case Number
26446/2015
Procedural Posture
Joinder Application / Application for Joinder in Ongoing Divorce Proceedings
Outcome
Joinder of the 2nd to 28th respondents granted; first respondent ordered to pay costs.
Judges
de Vos
Legal Topics
Joinder of Parties, Piercing Corporate Veil, Trust Asset Inclusion, Divorce Asset Distribution, Direct and Substantial Interest, Company Shareholding Analysis

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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C[...] G[...] F[...]

Applicant

M[...] F[...]

Respondent

M[...] F[...] NO TRUSTEE OF THE F[...] BUSINESS TRUST

Respondent

BUSINESS TRUST

Respondent

J[...] J[...] F[...] NO TRUSTEE OF THE F[...] BUSINESS TRUST

Respondent

RAMREF MANAGEMENT AND HOLDINGS (PTY) LTD

Respondent

FERMAR (PTY) LTD

Respondent

KAMEELDORING VLAKTE BOERDERY (PTY) LTD

Respondent

SCHWEIZER ABATTOIR (PTY) LTD

Respondent

DRIVEN DIESEL ENTERPRISES (PTY) LTD

Respondent

FERMAR CAPE TOWN (PTY) LTD

Respondent

SABLE GRANITE (PTY) LTD

Respondent

BHEJANE MINING AND CRUSHING (PTY) LTD

Respondent

BHEJANE GRANITE (PTY) LTD

Respondent

MAXON SECURITY SERVICES (PTY) LTD

Respondent

R & M RANCH (PTY) LTD

Respondent

LEGAD (PTY) LTD

Respondent

AFROPULSE 177 (PTY) LTD

Respondent

NORTHERN SPARK TRADING (PTY) LTD

Respondent

SILVER SNAKES TRADING (PTY) LTD

Respondent

BIG CEDAR TRADING 89 (PTY) LTD

Respondent

HIGHLAND GATE BOERDERY (PTY) LTD

Respondent

GVDM COLLECTIONS (PTY) LTD

Respondent

EV PROPERTY HOLDINGS (PTY) LTD

Respondent

BLOEMFONTEIN EV PROPERTIES (PTY) LTD

Respondent

LOWVELD SPORTS INITIATIVE (PTY) LTD

Respondent

J[...] J[...] F[...]

Respondent

THE MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Joinder Application / Application for Joinder in Ongoing Divorce Proceedings

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has established a direct and substantial interest warranting the joinder of the trust and companies to the divorce proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the merits of the relief sought against the trust and companies are relevant at the joinder stage.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's allegations, if accepted as true, meet the legal requirements for joinder.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicant need only establish a direct and substantial interest for the entities to be joined, not prove the merits of her claims at this stage. The applicant's allegations regarding the trust and companies, if accepted as true, are sufficient to meet the legal requirements for joinder. The court emphasized that the merits of the relief sought against the trust and companies are to be determined at trial, not during the joinder application. The opposition's argument conflating the joinder test with the merits was rejected, and the jurisprudence consistently supports the approach that the applicant's allegations are assumed true for joinder purposes. The court...

Court Disposition

Joinder of the 2nd to 28th respondents granted; first respondent ordered to pay costs.

Orders

  • The 2nd to 28th respondents are joined in the action instituted by the plaintiff against the defendant in case number 26446/2015.
  • The first respondent is ordered to pay the costs of this application.