South Africa Case Law

Mogola v Mogola and Others (HCA30/2017)

Mogola v Mogola and Others (HCA30/2017) [2018] ZALMPPHC 57 (19 October 2018)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

HCA30/2017

Judges

MG Phatudi, MF Kganyago, GC Muller

The majority held that the deceased's act of investing R800,000.00 as a donation in the name of the first respondent, without the appellant's written consent, constituted a violation of section 15(2)(c) of the Matrimonial Property Act. The funds originated from the joint estate, and the alienation was intended to prejudice the appellant's interest. The transaction was therefore null and void, and the funds must be paid into the deceased's estate. The minority (Muller J) disagreed with the majority's interpretation of section 15(2)(c), but concurred that the donation was fraudulent and prejudi…

Source excerpt

• Matrimonial Property Act
• Alienation Of Joint Estate Assets
• Donation Without Spousal Consent
• Interpretation Of Statutory Provisos
• Fraudulent Donation
• Executrix Powers

Broodie NO v Maposa and Others (1990/2017)

Broodie NO v Maposa and Others (1990/2017) [2018] ZAWCHC 18; 2018 (3) SA 129 (WCC); [2018] 2 All SA 364 (WCC) (19 February 2018)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

1990/2017

Judge

Binns-Ward

The High Court dismissed a widow’s claim that a deceased spouse’s donation of a close corporation interest was invalid for lack of consent, and sent fraud and capacity issues to trial.

• Matrimonial Property Act
• Community Of Property
• Close Corporation Member Interest
• Donation Without Spousal Consent
• Ratification Of Alienation
• Motion Proceedings Dispute Of Fact

Leboea v Leboea and Others (3339/2001)

Leboea v Leboea and Others (3339/2001) [2004] ZAFSHC 143 (23 September 2004)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

3339/2001

Judge

Kruger

The court found that Matseliso and Sellalane Leboea were married in community of property due to the declaration before the marriage officer. However, the estates were administered under the Black Administration Act, and the redistribution agreement reflected the parties' consensus, not a division per the Intestate Succession Act. The first defendant never accepted any inheritance, so no asset ever vested in the joint estate with the plaintiff. Section 15(3) of the Matrimonial Property Act did not apply, as there was no donation of a joint estate asset. The plaintiff was not impoverished and…

Source excerpt

• Matrimonial Property Act
• Intestate Succession
• Redistribution Agreement
• Donation Without Spousal Consent
• Customary Vs Civil Marriage
• Condictio Indebiti