Vogel N.O. v Melamed and Others (35494/16) [2017] ZAGPJHC 127 (5 April 2017)

Vogel N.O. v Melamed and Others (35494/16) [2017] ZAGPJHC 127 (5 April 2017)

The court held that, although the Trust Deed required a minimum of two trustees, it expressly provided that the remaining trustee may exercise the powers of the other trustees for maintenance and administration of the trust fund until another trustee is appointed. The applicant, as sole trustee, was therefore entitled to seek transfer of the trust funds into the trust's bank account and to institute proceedings for that purpose. The first respondent, having been removed as trustee, had no entitlement to retain control of the trust funds and was obliged to transfer them to the applicant. The applicant's failure to appoint a second trustee did not negate his duty to maintain and administer...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPJHC 127
Parties
Applicant: Andrew Graham Vogel N.O.; Respondent: Stephen Melamed; Respondent: Anna Miller (formerly Salzman); Respondent: Ryan Paul Salzman; Respondent: Leonard Mark Salzman; Respondent: The Master of the Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 April 2017
Case Number
35494/16
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / First Instance Judgment
Outcome
Application granted in favour of the applicant; punitive costs order against first and third respondents.
Judges
Bham AJ
Legal Topics
Trust Administration, Trustee Removal, Legal Capacity of Trustee, Maintenance of Children
Civil Procedure Family and Children Trust Administration Trustee Removal Legal Capacity of Trustee Maintenance of Children

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Graham Vogel N.O.

Applicant

Stephen Melamed

Respondent

Anna Miller (formerly Salzman)

Respondent

Ryan Paul Salzman

Respondent

Leonard Mark Salzman

Respondent

The Master of the Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / First Instance Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant, as sole trustee, had legal capacity to institute and pursue proceedings for transfer of trust funds.
  2. 2 Whether the first respondent was entitled to retain control of trust funds after removal as trustee.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was entitled to an order compelling transfer of trust funds and delivery of related documents.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, although the Trust Deed required a minimum of two trustees, it expressly provided that the remaining trustee may exercise the powers of the other trustees for maintenance and administration of the trust fund until another trustee is appointed. The applicant, as sole trustee, was therefore entitled to seek transfer of the trust funds into the trust's bank account and to institute proceedings for that purpose. The first respondent, having been removed as trustee, had no entitlement to retain control of the trust funds and was obliged to transfer them to the applicant. The applicant's failure to appoint a second trustee did not negate his duty to maintain and administer...

Court Disposition

Application granted in favour of the applicant; punitive costs order against first and third respondents.

Orders

  • The first respondent is ordered to forthwith transfer all funds currently held in Standard Bank account number 61470317 in the name of SAC Salzman at the Killarney branch of Standard Bank into the Investec Bank current account number 10011887899 in the name of the SAC Salzman Trust held at the Port Elizabeth branch...
  • The first respondent is ordered, within five court days from the date of this court order, to deliver to the applicant all documents of whatsoever nature which relate to the aforesaid Standard Bank account number and to the affairs of the SAC Salzman Trust and which are in the first respondent's possession or under...