W v Williams-Ashman N O and Others (823/2020) [2023] ZASCA 44; 2023 (4) SA 113 (SCA) (31 March 2023)
The Supreme Court of Appeal assumed, without deciding, that the appellant's prospective right to inherit under his former spouse's will could constitute property for the purposes of section 25 of the Constitution. The Court held that section 2B of the Wills Act does not amount to arbitrary deprivation of property, as it serves a legitimate legislative purpose: protecting testators from unintentionally benefiting former spouses in the immediate aftermath of divorce. The limitation restricting evidence of testamentary intention to the will itself is justified by the need for certainty and to prevent fraud, and does not offend procedural fairness. The Court found that the deprivation...
- Citation
- [2023] ZASCA 44
- Parties
- Appellant: J[..] M[…] W[…]; Respondent: David Howard Williams-Ashman N O; Respondent: Master of the High Court, Gauteng Division, Johannesburg; Respondent: J[…] B[…] C[…]; Respondent: I[…] N[…] F[…]; Respondent: The Speaker of the National Assembly; Respondent: Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces; Respondent: Minister of Justice and Correctional Service; Amicus Curiae: The Trustees for the time being of the Basic Rights Foundation of South Africa
- Court
- Supreme Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 31 March 2023
- Case Number
- 823/2020
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Western Cape Division of the High Court, Cape Town
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed.
- Judges
- Saldulker, Mbatha, Molefe, Kathree-Setiloane, Unterhalter
- Legal Topics
- Freedom of Testation, Arbitrary Deprivation of Property, Wills Act Section 2b, Testamentary Intention, Access to Court, Public Policy
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
J[..] M[…] W[…]
Appellant
David Howard Williams-Ashman N O
Respondent
Master of the High Court, Gauteng Division, Johannesburg
Respondent
J[…] B[…] C[…]
Respondent
I[…] N[…] F[…]
Respondent
The Speaker of the National Assembly
Respondent
Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces
Respondent
Minister of Justice and Correctional Service
Respondent
The Trustees for the time being of the Basic Rights Foundation of South Africa
Amicus Curiae
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Western Cape Division of the High Court, Cape Town
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether section 2B of the Wills Act 7 of 1953 constitutes an arbitrary deprivation of property in violation of section 25(1) of the Constitution.
- 2 Whether section 2B infringes the appellant's right of access to courts under section 34 of the Constitution.
- 3 Whether the limitation in section 2B, restricting evidence of testamentary intention to the will itself, is constitutionally valid.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court of Appeal assumed, without deciding, that the appellant's prospective right to inherit under his former spouse's will could constitute property for the purposes of section 25 of the Constitution. The Court held that section 2B of the Wills Act does not amount to arbitrary deprivation of property, as it serves a legitimate legislative purpose: protecting testators from unintentionally benefiting former spouses in the immediate aftermath of divorce. The limitation restricting evidence of testamentary intention to the will itself is justified by the need for certainty and to prevent fraud, and does not offend procedural fairness. The Court found that the deprivation...
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed.
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
- The appellant is ordered to pay the costs in the appeal of the third and fourth respondents, including the costs consequent upon the employment of counsel.
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