Gumede and Another v Master of the High Court, Pietermaritzburg and Others (16141/2023) [2024] ZAKZPHC 46 (14 June 2024)

Gumede and Another v Master of the High Court, Pietermaritzburg and Others (16141/2023) [2024] ZAKZPHC 46 (14 June 2024)

The court found that the applicants had launched their application on the factual premise that the Master acted under section 6(1) of the Trust Property Control Act, but later conceded that the Master had acted under section 7(1). This fundamental change in the applicants' case was not reflected in their affidavits or heads of argument, resulting in prejudice and unfairness to the respondents, who had prepared to meet the case as pleaded. The court held that, in motion proceedings, parties must define the issues in their affidavits and cannot make out a new case in argument. However, the court exercised its discretion to adjourn the application sine die, granting the applicants leave to...

Citation
[2024] ZAKZPHC 46
Parties
Applicant: Mbonginkosi Alois Gumede; Applicant: Sbonisiwe Precious Gumede; Respondent: Master of the High Court, Pietermaritzburg; Respondent: Phillip Bandlo Gumede; Respondent: Sabelo Goodman Gumede; Respondent: Thuthukani Dobe; Respondent: Sicelo Derrick Gumede; Respondent: Qaphelisani Obed Khuzwayo; Respondent: The Regional Land Claims Commissioner, Kwazulu-Natal
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 June 2024
Case Number
16141/2023
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Review of Administrative Decision; Interlocutory Adjournment
Outcome
Application adjourned sine die; applicants granted leave to supplement papers; respondents granted leave to file answering affidavit; applicants liable for wasted costs for the day.
Judges
M R Chetty
Legal Topics
Trust Property Control Act, Appointment of Trustees, Review of Administrative Action, Locus Standi, Costs Award
Land and Property Administrative Law Trust Property Control Act Appointment of Trustees Review of Administrative Action Locus Standi Costs Award

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mbonginkosi Alois Gumede

Applicant

Sbonisiwe Precious Gumede

Applicant

Master of the High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Respondent

Phillip Bandlo Gumede

Respondent

Sabelo Goodman Gumede

Respondent

Thuthukani Dobe

Respondent

Sicelo Derrick Gumede

Respondent

Qaphelisani Obed Khuzwayo

Respondent

The Regional Land Claims Commissioner, Kwazulu-Natal

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Review of Administrative Decision; Interlocutory Adjournment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Master of the High Court acted under the correct statutory provision in appointing interim trustees for the Makhosi-khosi Communal Property Trust.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants' challenge to the appointment of trustees is properly founded on section 6(1) or section 7(1) of the Trust Property Control Act.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants may amend or supplement their case after conceding the statutory basis for the Master's appointment.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had launched their application on the factual premise that the Master acted under section 6(1) of the Trust Property Control Act, but later conceded that the Master had acted under section 7(1). This fundamental change in the applicants' case was not reflected in their affidavits or heads of argument, resulting in prejudice and unfairness to the respondents, who had prepared to meet the case as pleaded. The court held that, in motion proceedings, parties must define the issues in their affidavits and cannot make out a new case in argument. However, the court exercised its discretion to adjourn the application sine die, granting the applicants leave to...

Court Disposition

Application adjourned sine die; applicants granted leave to supplement papers; respondents granted leave to file answering affidavit; applicants liable for wasted costs for the day.

Orders

  • The application is adjourned sine die.
  • The applicants are granted leave to supplement their papers regarding the relevant provision(s) of the Trust Property Control Act on which their case is founded.