Malepe v Thobejane and Another (1127/2018B) [2018] ZALMPPHC 14 (23 February 2018)

Malepe v Thobejane and Another (1127/2018B) [2018] ZALMPPHC 14 (23 February 2018)

The court found that the applicant failed to make full and honest disclosure of material facts, specifically her institution of divorce proceedings against the deceased and her relationship with another partner. The applicant had disassociated herself from the deceased prior to his death, as evidenced by the divorce...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] ZALMPPHC 14
Parties
Applicant: Molema Maane Malepe; Respondent: Dithabe Thobejane; Respondent: Tswelopele Funeral Parlour Undertaker & Funeral Directors
Court
Limpopo High Court, Polokwane
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 February 2018
Case Number
1127/2018B
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / First Instance
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Kganyago
Legal Topics
Right to Bury, Urgent Interdict, Disclosure of Material Facts
Family and Children Civil Procedure Right to Bury Urgent Interdict Disclosure of Material Facts

Source-derived case record

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Molema Maane Malepe

Applicant

Dithabe Thobejane

Respondent

Tswelopele Funeral Parlour Undertaker & Funeral Directors

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who has the legal right to bury the deceased, Makomane Solomon Malepe.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to an urgent interdict preventing the respondents from proceeding with the burial.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant failed to make full disclosure of material facts relevant to the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to make full and honest disclosure of material facts, specifically her institution of divorce proceedings against the deceased and her relationship with another partner. The applicant had disassociated herself from the deceased prior to his death, as evidenced by the divorce summons and her own statements. The deceased had expressed a wish to be buried by the first respondent in cooperation with his family, and this was corroborated by the deceased's brother. The applicant's reliance on the marriage certificate was insufficient given her conduct and lack of candour. The court aligned itself with the precedent that the wishes of the deceased and...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The applicant’s application is dismissed with costs.