Phalala and Another v Mashamaite and Another (87755/2190) [2021] ZAGPPHC 242 (26 April 2021)

Phalala and Another v Mashamaite and Another (87755/2190) [2021] ZAGPPHC 242 (26 April 2021)

The court found that the applicants, as the mother and brother of the deceased, did not have a direct and substantial interest in the deceased's estate, which was governed by the Intestate Succession Act. The deceased died intestate, unmarried, and was survived by children, who are the rightful heirs. The applicants' allegations regarding family business assets were unsupported by evidence. The requirements for locus standi were not met, and therefore the applicants were not entitled to the relief sought. The application was dismissed on the basis of lack of locus standi, making it unnecessary to consider the remaining points in limine.

Citation
[2021] ZAGPPHC 242
Parties
Applicant: Christina Matlae Phalala; Applicant: Victor Phalala; Respondent: Maupye Ribson Mashamaite; Respondent: Master of the High Court : Pretoria
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 April 2021
Case Number
87755/2190
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs jointly and severally, the one paying the other to be absolved.
Judges
Nyathi
Legal Topics
Locus Standi, Intestate Succession, Appointment of Executor, Administration of Estates Act, Review of Administrative Action
Civil Procedure Land and Property Locus Standi Intestate Succession Appointment of Executor Administration of Estates Act Review of Administrative Action

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christina Matlae Phalala

Applicant

Victor Phalala

Applicant

Maupye Ribson Mashamaite

Respondent

Master of the High Court : Pretoria

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have locus standi to challenge the appointment of the first respondent as executor of the deceased estate.
  2. 2 Whether the appointment of the first respondent as executor should be set aside.
  3. 3 Whether the liquidation and distribution account should be amended to include all properties and business interests of the deceased.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants, as the mother and brother of the deceased, did not have a direct and substantial interest in the deceased's estate, which was governed by the Intestate Succession Act. The deceased died intestate, unmarried, and was survived by children, who are the rightful heirs. The applicants' allegations regarding family business assets were unsupported by evidence. The requirements for locus standi were not met, and therefore the applicants were not entitled to the relief sought. The application was dismissed on the basis of lack of locus standi, making it unnecessary to consider the remaining points in limine.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs jointly and severally, the one paying the other to be absolved.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • Costs are awarded against the applicants jointly and severally, the one paying the other to be absolved.