M.F v V.F and Others (2003/22202) [2024] ZAGPJHC 318 (2 April 2024)

M.F v V.F and Others (2003/22202) [2024] ZAGPJHC 318 (2 April 2024)

The applicant failed to establish the third requirement for contempt, namely non-compliance with the order. The obligation to vacate the property only arises once the property is sold, which requires joint action by all trustees. There was no evidence that the property had been placed on the market or sold, nor that the first respondent refused to vacate for a purchaser. Both the applicant and first respondent, as trustees, failed to take steps to sell the property. The first respondent's defence that she had no obligation to vacate absent a sale was accepted. The application for contempt was dismissed, and no costs order was made due to the conduct of both parties.

Citation
[2024] ZAGPJHC 318
Parties
Applicant: M[...] F[...]; Respondent: V[...] F[...]; Respondent: F[...] G[...] G[...] N.O.; Respondent: V[...] F[...] (born G[...]) N.O.; Respondent: M[...] P[...] F[...] N.O.; Respondent: The Trustees for the Time Being of the Bekker Trust (IT6078/95)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 April 2024
Case Number
2003/22202
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Contempt Application Following Divorce Order and Settlement Agreement
Outcome
Application dismissed. No order as to costs.
Judges
A Bishop
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Settlement Agreement, Trustees Duties, Division of Property, Trust Property Control Act
Family and Children Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Settlement Agreement Trustees Duties Division of Property Trust Property Control Act

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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M[...] F[...]

Applicant

V[...] F[...]

Respondent

F[...] G[...] G[...] N.O.

Respondent

V[...] F[...] (born G[...]) N.O.

Respondent

M[...] P[...] F[...] N.O.

Respondent

The Trustees for the Time Being of the Bekker Trust (IT6078/95)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Contempt Application Following Divorce Order and Settlement Agreement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first respondent is in contempt of the court order dated 15 July 2005.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has proven non-compliance with the order by the first respondent.
  3. 3 Whether the trustees of the Bekker Trust have acted in accordance with the settlement agreement regarding sale of the property.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to establish the third requirement for contempt, namely non-compliance with the order. The obligation to vacate the property only arises once the property is sold, which requires joint action by all trustees. There was no evidence that the property had been placed on the market or sold, nor that the first respondent refused to vacate for a purchaser. Both the applicant and first respondent, as trustees, failed to take steps to sell the property. The first respondent's defence that she had no obligation to vacate absent a sale was accepted. The application for contempt was dismissed, and no costs order was made due to the conduct of both parties.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • There shall be no order as to costs.