Ortone v Belmer (41851/2015) [2017] ZAGPPHC 80 (2 March 2017)

Ortone v Belmer (41851/2015) [2017] ZAGPPHC 80 (2 March 2017)

The Court found that the deceased intended the Defendant to pay the Plaintiff R5000 per month from the income of his entire inheritance, not solely from Sunny Shades. The wording and context of the Will, as well as the use of 'inheritance' in multiple clauses, supported this interpretation. Even if the obligation were limited to Sunny Shades, the Defendant continued to operate the business and benefit from its assets under a new entity, Sun Cover Systems CC, which was deemed the alter ego of Sunny Shades. The Defendant's reliance on flawed financial statements and exaggerated debts was rejected. The Defendant's credibility was found lacking, and the Plaintiff's evidence was preferred. The...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 80
Parties
Plaintiff: Esther Ortone; Defendant: Karel Belmer
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 March 2017
Case Number
41851/2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Final Judgment
Outcome
Judgment is granted in favour of the Plaintiff as claimed.
Judges
Gcabashe
Legal Topics
Conditional Bequest, Will Interpretation, Inheritance Obligation, Specific Performance
Land and Property Civil Procedure Conditional Bequest Will Interpretation Inheritance Obligation Specific Performance

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Esther Ortone

Plaintiff

Karel Belmer

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff R5000 per month from the income of his entire inheritance or only from Sunny Shades.
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant's liquidation of Sunny Shades extinguished his obligation under the Will.
  3. 3 Whether the Defendant fraudulently avoided his payment obligation by continuing the business under a new entity.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the deceased intended the Defendant to pay the Plaintiff R5000 per month from the income of his entire inheritance, not solely from Sunny Shades. The wording and context of the Will, as well as the use of 'inheritance' in multiple clauses, supported this interpretation. Even if the obligation were limited to Sunny Shades, the Defendant continued to operate the business and benefit from its assets under a new entity, Sun Cover Systems CC, which was deemed the alter ego of Sunny Shades. The Defendant's reliance on flawed financial statements and exaggerated debts was rejected. The Defendant's credibility was found lacking, and the Plaintiff's evidence was preferred. The...

Court Disposition

Judgment is granted in favour of the Plaintiff as claimed.

Orders

  • The Defendant is directed to pay the Plaintiff the sum of R265,206.72.
  • The Defendant is to pay interest at a rate of 9% per annum on every amount of R5000 payable to the Plaintiff as of 29 June 2012, from the date it was payable until final payment.