Govender NO and Others v Gounden and Others (AR452/2015) [2018] ZAWCHC 128 (24 August 2018)

Govender NO and Others v Gounden and Others (AR452/2015) [2018] ZAWCHC 128 (24 August 2018)

The court held that the Matrimonial Property Act requires spousal consent only for the receipt of an inheritance, not for its renunciation. The first respondent, as an intestate heir married in community of property, acquired a vested right to the inheritance upon the death of the deceased, but was entitled to renounce that right without the consent of her spouse or his estate. The act of renunciation does not constitute a donation or alienation to another person, but merely relinquishes the right, causing the inheritance to devolve according to the Intestate Succession Act. The timing of the renunciation, whether before or after dies venit, does not affect its validity unless there is...

Citation
[2018] ZAWCHC 128
Parties
Appellant: Harold Govender N.O.; Appellant: Shahina Maharaj N.O.; Appellant: Miriam Bibi Abdool Rahman; Appellant: Mahomed Farhad Gounden; Respondent: Lutchmi Gounden; Respondent: Rianna Nivedita Gounden; Respondent: Master of the High Court, Durban; Respondent: Frederlike Arthemis Liasides N.O.
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 August 2018
Case Number
AR452/2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed with costs.
Judges
K Pillay, Koen, Ploos Van Amstel
Legal Topics
Matrimonial Property Act, Renunciation of Inheritance, Intestate Succession, Community of Property, Costs on Appeal
Family and Children Civil Procedure Matrimonial Property Act Renunciation of Inheritance Intestate Succession Community of Property Costs on Appeal

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harold Govender N.O.

Appellant

Shahina Maharaj N.O.

Appellant

Miriam Bibi Abdool Rahman

Appellant

Mahomed Farhad Gounden

Appellant

Lutchmi Gounden

Respondent

Rianna Nivedita Gounden

Respondent

Master of the High Court, Durban

Respondent

Frederlike Arthemis Liasides N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a spouse married in community of property requires the consent of the other spouse to validly renounce the benefits of an intestate inheritance.
  2. 2 Whether the renunciation of inheritance by the first respondent was valid without the consent of her spouse or his estate.
  3. 3 Whether the timing of the renunciation (pre or post dies venit) affects its validity.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Matrimonial Property Act requires spousal consent only for the receipt of an inheritance, not for its renunciation. The first respondent, as an intestate heir married in community of property, acquired a vested right to the inheritance upon the death of the deceased, but was entitled to renounce that right without the consent of her spouse or his estate. The act of renunciation does not constitute a donation or alienation to another person, but merely relinquishes the right, causing the inheritance to devolve according to the Intestate Succession Act. The timing of the renunciation, whether before or after dies venit, does not affect its validity unless there is...

Court Disposition

The appeal is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Insofar as the consent of this court might be required for the withdrawal of the first respondent’s application to adduce further evidence, such consent is granted.
  • Each party will be liable for their own costs of the application to adduce further evidence, the opposition thereto, and the dismissal of the appellants’ notice in terms of uniform rule 30 read together with uniform rule 41(1)(a).