Mnisi and Others v Master of the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Pretoria and Other (2023/013876) [2024] ZAGPPHC 683 (17 July 2024)

Mnisi and Others v Master of the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Pretoria and Other (2023/013876) [2024] ZAGPPHC 683 (17 July 2024)

The Court found that the trust was registered and administered by the Master of the High Court, Pretoria, and that Section 3(1)(a) of the Trust Property Control Act provides for continued jurisdiction by the Master despite changes in the location of the trust property. The applicants sought specific relief against the Master, including the appointment of trustees, which vested jurisdiction in this Court. The Court distinguished the respondents' reliance on Estate Agents Board v Lek, noting that the decision did not limit jurisdiction to one division. The Court also relied on JP van Schalkwyk Attorneys v Botha N.O. & another, which held that supervision by the Master is sufficient for...

Citation
[2024] ZAGPPHC 683
Parties
Applicant: Jacob Charles Mnisi; Applicant: Menzi John Nyambi; Applicant: Mahlekisane Mosa Chriwa; Applicant: Fanyana Enoch Bhembe; Respondent: The Master of the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Pretoria; Respondent: Smile Zandile Nkosi N.O.; Respondent: Hlupheka Salminah Mohale N.O.; Respondent: Rodah Lindiwe Mgwebya N.O.; Respondent: Josiah Ndabambi Mokoena N.O.; Respondent: Bongane Kenneth Shakoane N.O.; Respondent: Maquandashi Elias Mathaba N.O.; Respondent: Isaac Sithole N.O.; Respondent: Hendry Sipho Lamola N.O.; Respondent: Mokwazithembeka Mdzingase Nkambule N.O.; Respondent: Magolidi Jim Mandlazi N.O.; Respondent: Zulu Samuel Chirwa N.O.; Respondent: Hendry Ntinini Mzimba N.O.; Respondent: Agnes Ntomikayise Mavuso N.O.
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 July 2024
Case Number
2023/013876
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Determination of Jurisdictional Point in Limine Regarding Part B of the Application
Outcome
The point in limine regarding jurisdiction is dismissed. Costs are awarded against the second to fourteenth respondents.
Judges
DM Leathern
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of High Court, Trust Property Control Act, Appointment of Trustees, Interdict, Costs Award
Civil Procedure Land and Property Jurisdiction of High Court Trust Property Control Act Appointment of Trustees Interdict Costs Award

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jacob Charles Mnisi

Applicant

Menzi John Nyambi

Applicant

Mahlekisane Mosa Chriwa

Applicant

Fanyana Enoch Bhembe

Applicant

The Master of the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Pretoria

Respondent

Smile Zandile Nkosi N.O.

Respondent

Hlupheka Salminah Mohale N.O.

Respondent

Rodah Lindiwe Mgwebya N.O.

Respondent

Josiah Ndabambi Mokoena N.O.

Respondent

Bongane Kenneth Shakoane N.O.

Respondent

Maquandashi Elias Mathaba N.O.

Respondent

Isaac Sithole N.O.

Respondent

Hendry Sipho Lamola N.O.

Respondent

Mokwazithembeka Mdzingase Nkambule N.O.

Respondent

Magolidi Jim Mandlazi N.O.

Respondent

Zulu Samuel Chirwa N.O.

Respondent

Hendry Ntinini Mzimba N.O.

Respondent

Agnes Ntomikayise Mavuso N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Determination of Jurisdictional Point in Limine Regarding Part B of the Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria have jurisdiction to adjudicate Part B of the application concerning the Lebuyile Community Trust?
  2. 2 Is the relief sought against the Master of the High Court, Pretoria sufficient to vest jurisdiction in this Court?
  3. 3 Are the respondents correct in arguing that the matter should be heard in the Mpumalanga Division?

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the trust was registered and administered by the Master of the High Court, Pretoria, and that Section 3(1)(a) of the Trust Property Control Act provides for continued jurisdiction by the Master despite changes in the location of the trust property. The applicants sought specific relief against the Master, including the appointment of trustees, which vested jurisdiction in this Court. The Court distinguished the respondents' reliance on Estate Agents Board v Lek, noting that the decision did not limit jurisdiction to one division. The Court also relied on JP van Schalkwyk Attorneys v Botha N.O. & another, which held that supervision by the Master is sufficient for...

Court Disposition

The point in limine regarding jurisdiction is dismissed. Costs are awarded against the second to fourteenth respondents.

Orders

  • The point in limine as to the jurisdiction of this Court in respect of Part B raised by the second to fourteenth respondents is dismissed.
  • The second to fourteenth respondents are ordered to pay the costs of the applicants, such costs to be determined on scale C.