Hartmann and Others v Hacker N.O and Others (4720/2023) [2024] ZAFSHC 369 (25 November 2024)

Hartmann and Others v Hacker N.O and Others (4720/2023) [2024] ZAFSHC 369 (25 November 2024)

The court found that there are reasonable prospects that another court may find the applicants have locus standi as income and contingent capital beneficiaries, and that the third applicant has locus standi as a capital beneficiary. The principle that acts required within a fixed time cannot be ratified after the time to the prejudice of others may be applied by the appellate court. The substantive issues regarding the distribution event and the administration of the trust remain live and have practical consequences for the beneficiaries. The court was not convinced that the matter was moot, as the administration of the trust continued for two years after the alleged distribution event,...

Citation
[2024] ZAFSHC 369
Parties
Applicant: Tristian Hartmann; Applicant: Jean-Gabriel Hartmann; Applicant: Mark Keiser Hartmann; Respondent: Inge Joanne Hacker N.O.; Respondent: Timothy James Hacker N.O.; Respondent: Wendy Fiona Hay N.O.; Respondent: The Master of the High Court Bloemfontein
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 November 2024
Case Number
4720/2023
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Main Application
Outcome
Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal granted. Costs of the application for leave to appeal shall be costs in the appeal.
Judges
Daffue
Legal Topics
Trust Administration, Locus Standi, Declaratory Relief, Ratification of Trustee Decisions
Civil Procedure Land and Property Trust Administration Locus Standi Declaratory Relief Ratification of Trustee Decisions

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tristian Hartmann

Applicant

Jean-Gabriel Hartmann

Applicant

Mark Keiser Hartmann

Applicant

Inge Joanne Hacker N.O.

Respondent

Timothy James Hacker N.O.

Respondent

Wendy Fiona Hay N.O.

Respondent

The Master of the High Court Bloemfontein

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Main Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trustees of the Hartmann Family Trust could lawfully ratify an earlier decision to postpone the distribution event after the date had passed.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants had locus standi as income and/or capital beneficiaries to seek declaratory relief.
  3. 3 Whether the court erred in failing to decide the issues presented by prayers 1 and 2 of the notice of motion, including the declaration of the distribution event date and direction to pay trust income and capital.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there are reasonable prospects that another court may find the applicants have locus standi as income and contingent capital beneficiaries, and that the third applicant has locus standi as a capital beneficiary. The principle that acts required within a fixed time cannot be ratified after the time to the prejudice of others may be applied by the appellate court. The substantive issues regarding the distribution event and the administration of the trust remain live and have practical consequences for the beneficiaries. The court was not convinced that the matter was moot, as the administration of the trust continued for two years after the alleged distribution event,...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal granted. Costs of the application for leave to appeal shall be costs in the appeal.

Orders

  • Leave is granted to the applicants to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal.
  • The costs of the application for leave to appeal shall be costs in the appeal.