Wren and Another v Master of the Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth and Another (3727/2012) [2014] ZAECPEHC 98 (11 December 2014)

Wren and Another v Master of the Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth and Another (3727/2012) [2014] ZAECPEHC 98 (11 December 2014)

The court found that Annexures A and B, written by the deceased shortly before her suicide, were intended as testamentary documents supplementing her formal will. Both notes expressed clear intentions to benefit the applicants and assured the residual heirs that sufficient assets remained for them. The notes did not contain revocation clauses and, when read together, were not contradictory but rather complementary. The deceased's emotional state and the circumstances of drafting were considered, but the court was satisfied that she had the requisite testamentary capacity. The court held that Annexure A, being clearer, should be declared a codicil to the deceased's will under section 2(3)...

Citation
[2014] ZAECPEHC 98
Parties
Applicant: Sandra Jane Wren; Applicant: Yolandi Mynhardt; Respondent: The Master of the Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth; Respondent: Ian David Mitchell NO
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 December 2014
Case Number
3727/2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Declaratory Application Under Section 2(3) of the Wills Act
Outcome
Annexure A is declared a codicil to the will of the late Carolynn Ellen de Villiers; the Master is ordered to accept Annexure A as a codicil; costs to be paid from the estate on an attorney and client scale.
Judges
E Revelas, JW Eksteen
Legal Topics
Wills Act Section 2 3, Codicil Interpretation, Testamentary Intention, Costs in Estate Litigation
Land and Property Civil Procedure Wills Act Section 2 3 Codicil Interpretation Testamentary Intention Costs in Estate Litigation

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sandra Jane Wren

Applicant

Yolandi Mynhardt

Applicant

The Master of the Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth

Respondent

Ian David Mitchell NO

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Declaratory Application Under Section 2(3) of the Wills Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the handwritten note (Annexure A) by the deceased constitutes a valid codicil to her will under section 2(3) of the Wills Act.
  2. 2 Whether Annexures A and B are compatible or contradictory, and if both can be accepted as testamentary documents.
  3. 3 Whether the deceased had the requisite testamentary capacity when writing the notes.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Annexures A and B, written by the deceased shortly before her suicide, were intended as testamentary documents supplementing her formal will. Both notes expressed clear intentions to benefit the applicants and assured the residual heirs that sufficient assets remained for them. The notes did not contain revocation clauses and, when read together, were not contradictory but rather complementary. The deceased's emotional state and the circumstances of drafting were considered, but the court was satisfied that she had the requisite testamentary capacity. The court held that Annexure A, being clearer, should be declared a codicil to the deceased's will under section 2(3)...

Court Disposition

Annexure A is declared a codicil to the will of the late Carolynn Ellen de Villiers; the Master is ordered to accept Annexure A as a codicil; costs to be paid from the estate on an attorney and client scale.

Orders

  • Annexure A to the notice of motion is declared to be a codicil to the will of the late Carolynn Ellen de Villiers.
  • The first respondent is ordered to accept Annexure A for purposes of the Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965 as a codicil.