P.M.M v D.S.M N.O and Others (5858/2019) [2022] ZAGPPHC 15 (10 January 2022)

P.M.M v D.S.M N.O and Others (5858/2019) [2022] ZAGPPHC 15 (10 January 2022)

The applicant failed to prove that he was legally or customarily adopted by the deceased in accordance with the requirements of the Intestate Succession Act or the Reform of Customary Law of Succession Act. The evidence showed that the deceased was incarcerated at the time of the applicant's birth, and there was no credible proof of a customary law adoption or public pronouncement at the lobola ceremony. The applicant's affidavits contained material contradictions and failed to establish the necessary facts for locus standi or entitlement to inherit. The court found that the applicant was not a descendant of the deceased for purposes of intestate succession and therefore lacked standing...

Citation
[2022] ZAGPPHC 15
Parties
Applicant: P[...] M[...] M[...]; Respondent: D[...] S[...] M[...] N.O; Respondent: Capitec Bank Limited; Respondent: Master of the High Court; Respondent: MMI Group Holdings T/A Metropolitan
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 January 2022
Case Number
5858/2019
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Determination of Part B (main Application) After Interim Relief
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs awarded against the applicant for Part B; no order as to costs for Part A.
Judges
N.V. Khumalo
Legal Topics
Customary Law Adoption, Intestate Succession, Locus Standi, Removal of Executor, Duty of Support
Family and Children Civil Procedure Customary Law Adoption Intestate Succession Locus Standi Removal of Executor Duty of Support

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

P[...] M[...] M[...]

Applicant

D[...] S[...] M[...] N.O

Respondent

Capitec Bank Limited

Respondent

Master of the High Court

Respondent

MMI Group Holdings T/A Metropolitan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Final Determination of Part B (main Application) After Interim Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is a descendant of the deceased in terms of the Intestate Succession Act and the Reform of Customary Law of Succession Act.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was adopted by the deceased in accordance with Xhosa customary law or by legal process.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has locus standi to seek removal of the executrix.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to prove that he was legally or customarily adopted by the deceased in accordance with the requirements of the Intestate Succession Act or the Reform of Customary Law of Succession Act. The evidence showed that the deceased was incarcerated at the time of the applicant's birth, and there was no credible proof of a customary law adoption or public pronouncement at the lobola ceremony. The applicant's affidavits contained material contradictions and failed to establish the necessary facts for locus standi or entitlement to inherit. The court found that the applicant was not a descendant of the deceased for purposes of intestate succession and therefore lacked standing...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs awarded against the applicant for Part B; no order as to costs for Part A.

Orders

  • The applicant's application is dismissed.
  • The applicant is to pay the costs in Part B of this application.