Ngcobo and Others v Mathonsi and Others (685/2017) [2019] ZAKZDHC 32 (16 May 2019)
The court found that the transfer of the property to the first respondent was unlawful as it was effected without the inquiry mandated by section 2 of the Conversion of Certain Rights into Leasehold or Ownership Act. The deceased was the holder of the certificate of occupation, and upon his death, the property should have been transferred to his estate, not directly to the first respondent. The process followed excluded other beneficiaries listed in the certificate and failed to comply with statutory requirements. The court held that only after a proper inquiry and declaration by the Director-General could ownership be determined and transferred in accordance with intestate succession....
- Citation
- [2019] ZAKZDHC 32
- Parties
- Applicant: Thandi Florentine Ngcobo; Applicant: Mayvis Thembi Mathonsi; Applicant: Frieda Thembi Mathonsi; Respondent: Angel Bongiwe Mathonsi; Respondent: Ethekwini Municipality; Respondent: Registrar of Deeds for the Province of KwaZulu-Natal; Respondent: Master of the High Court
- Court
- Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 16 May 2019
- Case Number
- 685/2017
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Judgment
- Outcome
- Application granted; transfer of property to first respondent set aside; inquiry and proper succession process ordered.
- Judges
- Radebe
- Legal Topics
- Conversion of Rights Act, Intestate Succession, Transfer of Property, Certificate of Occupation, Judicial Review
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Thandi Florentine Ngcobo
Applicant
Mayvis Thembi Mathonsi
Applicant
Frieda Thembi Mathonsi
Applicant
Angel Bongiwe Mathonsi
Respondent
Ethekwini Municipality
Respondent
Registrar of Deeds for the Province of KwaZulu-Natal
Respondent
Master of the High Court
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the transfer of the property into the name of the first respondent was lawful under the Conversion of Certain Rights into Leasehold or Ownership Act.
- 2 Whether an inquiry as required by section 2 of the Act was conducted before the transfer.
- 3 Whether the rights of other heirs and parties listed in the certificate of occupation were considered.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the transfer of the property to the first respondent was unlawful as it was effected without the inquiry mandated by section 2 of the Conversion of Certain Rights into Leasehold or Ownership Act. The deceased was the holder of the certificate of occupation, and upon his death, the property should have been transferred to his estate, not directly to the first respondent. The process followed excluded other beneficiaries listed in the certificate and failed to comply with statutory requirements. The court held that only after a proper inquiry and declaration by the Director-General could ownership be determined and transferred in accordance with intestate succession....
Court Disposition
Application granted; transfer of property to first respondent set aside; inquiry and proper succession process ordered.
Orders
- The transfer of the property to the first respondent is set aside.
- The Registrar of Deeds is ordered to cancel the Deed of Grant No. TG027408/09 in respect of the property.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment