Mere v Mere and Others (22159/2017) [2019] ZAGPPHC 90 (26 March 2019)

Mere v Mere and Others (22159/2017) [2019] ZAGPPHC 90 (26 March 2019)

The application was fundamentally flawed due to the applicant's failure to join all heirs and current property owners, which rendered the matter incapable of proper adjudication. The valuations submitted by the applicant were irrelevant, as they reflected property values as at 2016, not 2002, and did not address the state of the properties at the time of the original estate valuation. The applicant and his attorney were aware of these shortcomings but nevertheless proceeded to set the matter down, causing the respondents to incur unnecessary legal expenses. The court held that the applicant should bear the wasted costs and that the matter could not be re-enrolled until such costs were...

Citation
[2019] ZAGPPHC 90
Parties
Applicant: Bobby Saxton Mere; Respondent: Elizabeth Mere; Respondent: Michael Mere; Respondent: Master of the High Court – Pretoria
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 March 2019
Case Number
22159/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Postponement With Costs
Outcome
Application postponed sine die; applicant to pay wasted costs; matter not to be re-enrolled until costs are paid.
Judges
A Millar
Legal Topics
Estate Administration, Non Joinder, Costs Award, Intestate Succession
Family and Children Civil Procedure Estate Administration Non Joinder Costs Award Intestate Succession

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

Parties

Bobby Saxton Mere

Applicant

Elizabeth Mere

Respondent

Michael Mere

Respondent

Master of the High Court – Pretoria

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Postponement With Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application to re-open the estate of the late Itumeleng John Mere can be properly adjudicated in the absence of all heirs and current property owners.
  2. 2 Whether the valuations provided by the applicant are relevant to the alleged under-valuation of estate properties in 2002.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant should bear the wasted costs for setting the matter down when it was not ripe for hearing.

Ratio Decidendi

The application was fundamentally flawed due to the applicant's failure to join all heirs and current property owners, which rendered the matter incapable of proper adjudication. The valuations submitted by the applicant were irrelevant, as they reflected property values as at 2016, not 2002, and did not address the state of the properties at the time of the original estate valuation. The applicant and his attorney were aware of these shortcomings but nevertheless proceeded to set the matter down, causing the respondents to incur unnecessary legal expenses. The court held that the applicant should bear the wasted costs and that the matter could not be re-enrolled until such costs were...

Court Disposition

Application postponed sine die; applicant to pay wasted costs; matter not to be re-enrolled until costs are paid.

Orders

  • The application is postponed sine die.
  • The applicant is to pay the wasted costs.