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.
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
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has established a direct and substantial interest warranting the joinder of the trust and companies to the divorce proceedings.
- 2 Whether the merits of the relief sought against the trust and companies are relevant at the joinder stage.
- 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.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment