Mamabolo v Mamabolo and Another (11855/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 689 (8 September 2022)

Mamabolo v Mamabolo and Another (11855/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 689 (8 September 2022)

The court found that the applicant's claim was prescribed, as she became aware of the will and the property transfer well beyond the three-year period stipulated by the Prescription Act. No reasonable explanation or condonation for the delay was provided. The application was further dismissed due to the existence of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] ZAGPPHC 689
Parties
Applicant: Mmalatlha Jerita Mamabolo; Respondent: Maggy Mamabolo; Respondent: Iris Semakaleng Makgatho; Respondent: Partick Makgato; Respondent: John Ngobeni; Respondent: Clementine Ngobeni; Respondent: Master of the High Court, Mahikeng; Respondent: Registrar of Deeds; Respondent: City of Tshwane Municipality
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 September 2022
Case Number
11855/2021
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Final Judgment on Application
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs on a party and party scale.
Judges
Holland-Muter
Legal Topics
Prescription Act Claim, Administration of Estates, Validity of Will, Material Dispute of Facts, Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Condonation for Late Filing
Land and Property Civil Procedure Prescription Act Claim Administration of Estates Validity of Will Material Dispute of Facts Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Condonation for Late Filing

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mmalatlha Jerita Mamabolo

Applicant

Maggy Mamabolo

Respondent

Iris Semakaleng Makgatho

Respondent

Partick Makgato

Respondent

John Ngobeni

Respondent

Clementine Ngobeni

Respondent

Master of the High Court, Mahikeng

Respondent

Registrar of Deeds

Respondent

City of Tshwane Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Final Judgment on Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's claim regarding the property and estate is prescribed under the Prescription Act.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has provided sufficient grounds to challenge the validity of the deceased's will.
  3. 3 Whether the application procedure is appropriate given the existence of material disputes of fact.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's claim was prescribed, as she became aware of the will and the property transfer well beyond the three-year period stipulated by the Prescription Act. No reasonable explanation or condonation for the delay was provided. The application was further dismissed due to the existence of material disputes of fact, particularly regarding the validity of the will and allegations of fraud, which cannot be resolved on affidavit and require action proceedings. The applicant failed to provide admissible expert evidence and did not apply for referral to oral evidence or trial. The court concluded that the applicant had no real right to the property, only a personal...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs on a party and party scale.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs, costs on a party and party scale.