Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
R.R and Others v J.R and Others (16015/2022P) [2024] ZAKZPHC 39 (22 April 2024)
The High Court dismissed an application to remove trustees or wind up a family trust, holding that trustee conflict alone did not justify intervention.
Price and Another v Kaplan N.O. and Others (44937/2019) [2022] ZAGPPHC 429 (14 June 2022)
The court found that the Trust Deed required a minimum of three trustees for the Trust to have capacity to act. Morris Kaplan failed to appoint additional trustees after the deaths of the original trustees, resulting in the Trust’s incapacity for over fourteen years. Actions taken by Morris, including resolutions and appointments, were invalid due to lack of authority. The purported appointment of new trustees without letters of authority from the Master was also invalid. The applicants established grounds for removal of Morris and the other respondents as trustees due to maladministration, b…
Source excerpt
van Rensburg v van Rensburg N.O and Others (1458/2019) [2020] ZAECGHC 29 (24 March 2020)
The court found that the DH van Rensburg Trust was created solely for the benefit of the Testatrix and terminated upon her death, as stipulated in the will. The applicant and her siblings were not beneficiaries of the Trust but heirs to the estate after the Trust's termination. The loss suffered by the applicant was personal and did not constitute a loss to the Trust. No conflict of interest existed between the trustees' duties and their interests, and no proper case was made for their removal under section 20(1) of the Trust Property Control Act. The court held that the applicant's claim, if…
Source excerpt
Louw and Others v Absa Trust Limited and Others (19085/2007) [2014] ZAWCHC 159 (28 October 2014)
The High Court dismissed a trust-breach claim, holding that Absa Trust was not the liable successor and that estoppel against it was not proved.
Explore more
