Majake v Jones and Others (2020/21215) [2022] ZAGPJHC 433 (15 June 2022)

Majake v Jones and Others (2020/21215) [2022] ZAGPJHC 433 (15 June 2022)

The applicant failed to discharge the onus of proving that the payment of R455,000 by the deceased to the First Respondent constituted a donation or alienation without value as contemplated in section 15(3)(c) of the Matrimonial Property Act. The evidence did not establish that the payment was prompted by motives of sheer liberality or disinterested benevolence, nor was it made in recognition of benefits or services received. The applicant's contention that the payment was made to deprive him and the joint estate of an asset for the deceased's own benefit, using the First Respondent as a cover, was unsupported by proof and, if accepted, would negate the existence of a donation. The...

Citation
[2022] ZAGPJHC 433
Parties
Applicant: Tumane Ophinias Majake; Respondent: Rachel Sesinyana Jones; Respondent: Rachel Sesinyana Jones N.O.; Respondent: Master of the High Court, Johannesburg
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 June 2022
Case Number
2020/21215
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Opposed Motion; Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs awarded against the applicant.
Judges
L.J. du Bruyn
Legal Topics
Matrimonial Property Act, Donation, Alienation Without Value, Joint Estate, Onus of Proof
Family and Children Civil Procedure Matrimonial Property Act Donation Alienation Without Value Joint Estate Onus of Proof

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tumane Ophinias Majake

Applicant

Rachel Sesinyana Jones

Respondent

Rachel Sesinyana Jones N.O.

Respondent

Master of the High Court, Johannesburg

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Opposed Motion; Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the payment of R455,000 by the deceased to the First Respondent constituted a donation or alienation without value under section 15(3)(c) of the Matrimonial Property Act.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to have the payment declared null and void and/or adjusted under section 15(9)(b) of the Matrimonial Property Act.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to costs.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to discharge the onus of proving that the payment of R455,000 by the deceased to the First Respondent constituted a donation or alienation without value as contemplated in section 15(3)(c) of the Matrimonial Property Act. The evidence did not establish that the payment was prompted by motives of sheer liberality or disinterested benevolence, nor was it made in recognition of benefits or services received. The applicant's contention that the payment was made to deprive him and the joint estate of an asset for the deceased's own benefit, using the First Respondent as a cover, was unsupported by proof and, if accepted, would negate the existence of a donation. The...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs awarded against the applicant.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • The Applicant shall pay the First and Second Respondents' costs of the application.