South Africa Case Law

Mbalane v Mbalane and Others (02/2025)

Mbalane v Mbalane and Others (02/2025) [2025] ZAECMHC 14 (4 March 2025)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

02/2025

Judge

Cengani-Mbakaza

The court found that no customary union existed between the applicant and the first respondent, as evidenced by affidavits and official documentation. The applicant's reliance on the deceased's surname and initiation rituals was insufficient to establish burial rights at the paternal home. The deceased's wishes regarding burial location were not credibly established; the only explicit wishes presented were those of the applicant. The court held that both parents are heirs, but the deceased was cared for by his mother from infancy and laid to rest at her home. The urgency was accepted due to t…

Source excerpt

• Burial Rights
• Customary Law Application
• Urgent Interdict
• Exhumation
• Intestate Succession

Mohasoa and Others v Mohasoa and Others (B3028/2024)

Mohasoa and Others v Mohasoa and Others (B3028/2024) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1149 (11 November 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

B3028/2024

Judge

MP Kumalo

The High Court reconsidered an ex parte burial order and held that the deceased should be buried near his late wife, based on his expressed wishes.

• Burial Rights
• Customary Marriage Validity
• Interdict
• Family Dispute Resolution
• Burial-rights
• Ex-parte-interdict

Mafube Coal Mining Proprietary Limited v Buti and Others (LCC40/2024)

Mafube Coal Mining Proprietary Limited v Buti and Others (LCC40/2024) [2024] ZALCC 40 (6 November 2024)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC40/2024

Judge

Ncube

The court found that the respondents' reliance on an established practice permitting burial at the homestead was misplaced, as the only established practice was burial at graveyard 1, not at homesteads. There was no consent from the applicant for burial at the homestead, and the respondents had previously agreed to relocate graves but later reneged and made unreasonable demands. Furthermore, the respondents raised the issue of established practice for the first time on appeal, without reference to section 6(2)(dA) of ESTA in their earlier pleadings. Applying the test for leave to appeal, the…

Source excerpt

• Leave To Appeal
• Burial Rights
• Established Practice
• Consent Of Landowner
• Superior Courts Act
• Esta Section 6 2 Da

G.E.M v M.M.M and Another (5928/2024)

G.E.M v M.M.M and Another (5928/2024) [2024] ZAFSHC 330 (22 October 2024)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

5928/2024

Judge

JP Daffue

Although the applicant was still lawfully married to the deceased and prima facie entitled to arrange his burial, the court found that the marriage had irretrievably broken down, with the parties living separately for three years and awaiting trial dates for divorce. The deceased had formed a new relationship, was embraced by his family and life partner, and had expressed a clear wish to be buried in Hertzogville next to his father. The applicant had severed ties with the deceased and his family, and fairness required that the deceased's wishes and the family’s arrangements be respected. The…

Source excerpt

• Burial Rights
• Urgent Interdict
• Breakdown Of Marriage
• Customary And Civil Marriage
• Fairness In Family Disputes

P.N and Others v P.N (104659/2022)

P.N and Others v P.N (104659/2022) [2024] ZAGPJHC 924 (18 September 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

104659/2022

Judge

Moshoana

The High Court held that a surviving spouse may choose cremation over burial. The mother and minor children lacked enforceable rights to stop it.

• Burial Rights
• Cremation Vs Burial
• Customary Law Marriage
• Constitutional Cultural Rights
• Burial-rights
• Cremation

Johannesburg City Parks and Zoo and Another v G.Z (A2023/027196)

Johannesburg City Parks and Zoo and Another v G.Z (A2023/027196) [2024] ZAGPJHC 863; [2025] 1 All SA 388 (GJ) (10 September 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A2023/027196

Judges

Makume, Senyatsi, Manoim

The High Court dismissed an appeal over gravesite rights, holding the widow paid the burial fees, had private rights in the grave, and could erect a tombstone.

• Burial Rights
• Municipal By Laws
• Grave Site Ownership
• Common Law Spousal Rights
• Burial-rights
• Grave-site-ownership

Manzini v Dlalisa and Another (2024/101585)

Manzini v Dlalisa and Another (2024/101585) [2024] ZAGPJHC 920 (6 September 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2024/101585

Judge

Du Plessis

Urgent burial dispute dismissed after the court found a customary marriage on balance of probabilities and held the respondent could determine burial arrangements.

• Customary Marriage Validity
• Burial Rights
• Urgent Interdict
• Lobolo Requirements
• Cohabitation Presumption
• Burial-rights

Zilwana v Booi and Another (3476/2024)

Zilwana v Booi and Another (3476/2024) [2024] ZAECMKHC 133 (22 August 2024)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

3476/2024

Judge

B B Brody

The applicant failed to disclose material facts, including her true relationship to the deceased and the existence of a valid marriage and Will. The evidence presented by the first respondent, including the marriage certificate, lobola agreement, and Joint Will, established that she was the lawful spouse and had resided with the deceased at Takalani. The applicant's locus standi was questionable, and her allegations were found to be false. Applying the Plascon-Evans approach, the disputes raised were not genuine. The court held that the first respondent, as the lawful spouse, has the right to…

Source excerpt

• Urgent Interdict
• Locus Standi
• Burial Rights
• Customary Marriage
• Joint Will

Makatasi v Metele and Another (389/2024)

Makatasi v Metele and Another (389/2024) [2024] ZAECBHC 11 (18 May 2024)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Bhisho

Case number

389/2024

Judge

Hartle

The court found that, although the applicant and the deceased were physically separated at the time of his death, their marriage was not merely a formality and remained family-centered. The applicant had not severed marital ties, and the family, including the other children, supported her in taking the lead in burial arrangements. The first respondent failed to provide credible evidence that the deceased wished to be buried elsewhere or that the applicant's marriage was only nominal. The court applied the fairness approach, considering the applicant's role as surviving spouse and intestate he…

Source excerpt

• Burial Rights
• Intestate Succession
• Urgent Interdict
• Family Dispute Resolution

Manzi v Manzi (Born Ntsizi) and Others (896/2024)

Manzi v Manzi (Born Ntsizi) and Others (896/2024) [2024] ZAECMHC 28 (14 May 2024)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

896/2024

Judge

MN Notunununu

Leave to appeal was refused in a burial-dispute matter after the court found no reasonable prospects of success and ordered attorney-and-client costs.

• Leave To Appeal
• Urgent Application
• Burial Rights
• Customary Law
• Costs Award
• Leave-to-appeal