Gowar and Another v Gowar and Others (149/2015) [2016] ZASCA 101; [2016] 3 All SA 382 (SCA); 2016 (5) SA 225 (SCA) (9 June 2016)

Gowar and Another v Gowar and Others (149/2015) [2016] ZASCA 101; [2016] 3 All SA 382 (SCA); 2016 (5) SA 225 (SCA) (9 June 2016)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that neither the appellants nor the respondents established sufficient grounds for the removal of trustees under common law or section 20(1) of the Trust Property Control Act. The allegations of misconduct and breach of fiduciary duties were disputed and intertwined with factual conflicts unsuitable for resolution on the papers. The appellants failed to prove that the respondents' conduct imperiled the trust property or its administration, or that removal would be in the interests of the trusts and beneficiaries. The variation of beneficiaries in the Rietfontein Trust was not proven to be invalid, as there was no evidence that the David Gowar Trust had...

Citation
[2016] ZASCA 101
Parties
Appellant: Johanna Dorothea Gowar; Appellant: Francois Peter Gowar; Respondent: Reginald David Gowar; Respondent: Tertius Nicolaas van der Walt; Respondent: Master of the High Court, Grahamstown
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 June 2016
Case Number
149/2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal and Cross Appeal From Eastern Cape Division of the High Court, Grahamstown
Outcome
Both the appeal and the cross-appeal are dismissed with costs.
Judges
Maya DP, Majiedt JA, Petse JA, Victor AJJA, Baartman AJJA
Legal Topics
Trustee Removal, Trust Property Control Act, Termination of Trust, Fiduciary Duties, Variation of Trust Deed
Land and Property Civil Procedure Trustee Removal Trust Property Control Act Termination of Trust Fiduciary Duties Variation of Trust Deed

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 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Johanna Dorothea Gowar

Appellant

Francois Peter Gowar

Appellant

Reginald David Gowar

Respondent

Tertius Nicolaas van der Walt

Respondent

Master of the High Court, Grahamstown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal and Cross Appeal From Eastern Cape Division of the High Court, Grahamstown

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should remove trustees from office under common law or section 20(1) of the Trust Property Control Act.
  2. 2 Whether the requirements for termination of the trusts under section 13 of the Trust Property Control Act are satisfied.
  3. 3 Whether the alleged misconduct or breakdown in trustee relationships imperils the trust property or its administration.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that neither the appellants nor the respondents established sufficient grounds for the removal of trustees under common law or section 20(1) of the Trust Property Control Act. The allegations of misconduct and breach of fiduciary duties were disputed and intertwined with factual conflicts unsuitable for resolution on the papers. The appellants failed to prove that the respondents' conduct imperiled the trust property or its administration, or that removal would be in the interests of the trusts and beneficiaries. The variation of beneficiaries in the Rietfontein Trust was not proven to be invalid, as there was no evidence that the David Gowar Trust had...

Court Disposition

Both the appeal and the cross-appeal are dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs including the costs of two counsel.
  • The cross-appeal is dismissed with costs.