Matabane and Others v Master of the High Court, Pretoria and Others (8473/07) [2009] ZAGPPHC 191 (20 May 2009)

Matabane and Others v Master of the High Court, Pretoria and Others (8473/07) [2009] ZAGPPHC 191 (20 May 2009)

The court found that RRM1, as amended, was intended by the deceased to be his last will and testament. The document was entirely in the deceased's handwriting, signed by him, and reflected his intention to benefit his relatives and exclude the second respondent, who had already received her share of the estate. The amendments made to RRM1, though not signed or initialled, were held to reflect the deceased's true testamentary intention. The advice given by Mr Mendelow and the deceased's actions demonstrated that he intended RRM1 to have immediate testamentary effect, notwithstanding the plan to have it typed. The court accepted Mr Mendelow's bona fides and found no evidence of fraud or...

Citation
[2009] ZAGPPHC 191
Parties
Applicant: Ramadimetje Magdeline Matabane; Applicant: Molebogeng Emily Matabane; Applicant: Morammofo Sipho Matabane; Respondent: Master of the High Court, Pretoria; Respondent: Sebiletso Motone Matabane; Respondent: Issy William Gundelfinger N.O; Respondent: Kheswa Rosie Flater; Respondent: Matabane Malerotho Gilbert; Respondent: Matabane Percy Tsidisho
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 May 2009
Case Number
8473/07
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application granted; RRM1 declared the last will and testament of the deceased; Mr Mendelow appointed executor; costs to be paid by the estate.
Judges
Botha
Legal Topics
Wills Act Section 2 3, Revocation of Will, Executor Appointment, Testamentary Intention
Land and Property Civil Procedure Wills Act Section 2 3 Revocation of Will Executor Appointment Testamentary Intention

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ramadimetje Magdeline Matabane

Applicant

Molebogeng Emily Matabane

Applicant

Morammofo Sipho Matabane

Applicant

Master of the High Court, Pretoria

Respondent

Sebiletso Motone Matabane

Respondent

Issy William Gundelfinger N.O

Respondent

Kheswa Rosie Flater

Respondent

Matabane Malerotho Gilbert

Respondent

Matabane Percy Tsidisho

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the document RRM1 constitutes the valid last will and testament of the deceased.
  2. 2 Whether the previous will, RRM3, was revoked by the deceased.
  3. 3 Whether the amendments to RRM1, though unsigned, reflect the deceased's testamentary intention.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that RRM1, as amended, was intended by the deceased to be his last will and testament. The document was entirely in the deceased's handwriting, signed by him, and reflected his intention to benefit his relatives and exclude the second respondent, who had already received her share of the estate. The amendments made to RRM1, though not signed or initialled, were held to reflect the deceased's true testamentary intention. The advice given by Mr Mendelow and the deceased's actions demonstrated that he intended RRM1 to have immediate testamentary effect, notwithstanding the plan to have it typed. The court accepted Mr Mendelow's bona fides and found no evidence of fraud or...

Court Disposition

Application granted; RRM1 declared the last will and testament of the deceased; Mr Mendelow appointed executor; costs to be paid by the estate.

Orders

  • An order is granted in terms of prayers 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the notice of motion.
  • The costs of the application, including the costs of opposition, are to be paid by the estate of the deceased.