M.Z.O N.O and Another v S.M and Others (2372/2024; 5234/2024) [2025] ZAFSHC 40 (13 February 2025)
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
2372/2024; 5234/2024
Judge
Hefer AJ
The High Court dismissed two consolidated applications over a deceased estate property, holding that rejected codicils had no legal effect and costs followed the result.
Matshwene N.O and Another v ABSA Bank Limited and Others (18797/2021) [2024] ZAGPPHC 864 (27 August 2024)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
18797/2021
Judge
Gwala AJ
The court set aside documents used in a fraudulent reverse mortgage scheme, held that ownership never passed from the Babirwa Trust, and ordered re-registration of the property.
Coetzer and Others v Coetzer (A85/19) [2022] ZAGPPHC 872 (8 November 2022)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
A85/19
Judges
Madiba SS, Ndlokovane N, Tlhapi VV
The High Court varied an earlier appeal order under Rule 42(1)(b) to correct a patent error and substituted it with dismissal of all claims with costs.
B.B v F.D.B and Others (135/2019) [2022] ZAFSHC 261 (11 October 2022)
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
135/2019
Judge
C Reinders
The High Court granted joinder of trustees to a divorce counterclaim, holding they had a direct and substantial interest in declaratory relief about trust-held property.
Victor and Another v Wonderhoek Farms (Pty) Ltd and Others (2145/2021) [2021] ZAFSHC 219 (7 September 2021)
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
2145/2021
Judge
Reinders
The High Court dismissed an insolvent applicant’s bid for interim relief, holding that he lacked locus standi, the properties were not shown to be his estate, and all trustees had not been joined.
C M v E M (1086/2018) [2020] ZASCA 48; [2020] 3 All SA 1 (SCA); 2020 (5) SA 49 (SCA) (5 May 2020)
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
1086/2018
Judges
Maya, Wallis, Mokgohloa, Dlodlo, Eksteen
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that while the capital underlying the respondent's living annuities is owned by the insurer and not accessible to the annuitant, the respondent's right to future annuity payments constitutes an asset in his estate for purposes of accrual calculation upon divorce. The court rejected the argument that the annuities are 'trust property' under the Financial Institutions Act, finding no fiduciary relationship or statutory indication to that effect. The court distinguished Commissioner, South African Revenue Service v Higgo as dealing with a different type of annuit…