South Africa Case Law

Sabdia N.O and Another v Soma and Another (845/2023)

Sabdia N.O and Another v Soma and Another (845/2023) [2024] ZASCA 174; 2025 (4) SA 450 (SCA) (12 December 2024)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

845/2023

Judges

Mbatha, Hughes, Keightley, Unterhalter, Coppin

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the will of the late Dr Mahamed Faruk Sabdia expressly authorised the executors to charge and be paid all usual professional fees and other charges for business transacted, time spent, and acts done in connection with the administration of the estate. Section 51(1)(a) of the Administration of Estates Act allows a testator to fix the executor's remuneration, including professional fees. The remuneration clause and clause 5.3 of the will clearly indicated the testator's intention that the executors, including one who was an attorney, and his associates, sho…

Source excerpt

• Executor Remuneration
• Administration Of Deceased Estates
• Professional Fees
• Will Interpretation
• Taxation Of Costs

Spangenberg and Others v Engelbrecht NO and Another (717/21)

Spangenberg and Others v Engelbrecht NO and Another (717/21) [2023] ZASCA 100 (14 June 2023)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

717/21

Judges

Petse, Mbatha, Matojane, Weiner, Mali

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that a will clearly granted habitatio over two plots, rejected extrinsic evidence, and dismissed the appeal with costs.

• Will Interpretation
• Right Of Habitatio
• Extrinsic Evidence
• Freedom Of Testation
• Will-interpretation
• Habitatio

Association for Voluntary Sterilization of South Africa v Standard Trust Limited and Others (325/2022)

Association for Voluntary Sterilization of South Africa v Standard Trust Limited and Others (325/2022) [2023] ZASCA 87; - (7 June 2023)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

325/2022

Judges

Ponnan, Saldulker, Meyer, Kathree-Setiloane, Siwendu

The Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal seeking declaratory interpretation of a will clause, holding the relief was abstract, vague, and lacked practical effect.

• Declaratory Relief
• Testamentary Trust
• Will Interpretation
• Judicial Discretion
• Declaratory-relief
• Will-interpretation

Geza and Others v Standard Trust Limited and Others (3534/2021)

Geza and Others v Standard Trust Limited and Others (3534/2021) [2023] ZAECQBHC 15 (14 March 2023)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Gqeberha

Case number

3534/2021

Judges

J W Eksteen, R E Griffiths

High Court matter on interpreting a joint will held that “our children” included a child born out of wedlock, and dismissed the exclusionary application.

• Will Interpretation
• Joint Will
• Children Born Out Of Wedlock
• Succession
• Declaratory Relief
• Will-interpretation

Mitchell and Another v Mitchell N.O. and Others (5380/2022)

Mitchell and Another v Mitchell N.O. and Others (5380/2022) [2022] ZAFSHC 355 (29 December 2022)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

5380/2022

Judge

Mathebula

Urgent relief by two trust beneficiaries for stipends, rent, and medical aid was refused after the court found the disputes required oral evidence.

• Trust Management
• Maintenance Claims
• Urgent Interdict
• Will Interpretation
• Rule Nisi
• Costs Orders

IJ Steenkamp N.O v LH Moeti (3894/2019)

IJ Steenkamp N.O v LH Moeti (3894/2019) [2021] ZAFSHC 137 (29 April 2021)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

3894/2019

Judge

C.S. Parks

The court dismissed an eviction application under PIE, finding the respondent occupied the property with family authorisation and was not unlawful.

• Prevention Of Illegal Eviction Act
• Administration Of Estates Act
• Customary Law Rights
• Locus Standi
• Will Interpretation
• Prevention-of-illegal-eviction

Van der Merwe v De Klerk and Others (82534/2016)

Van der Merwe v De Klerk and Others (82534/2016) [2017] ZAGPPHC 593 (12 September 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

82534/2016

Judge

Mothle

The Court found that the parties had no valid reason to deviate from the Will, and no challenge to its validity was raised. The executors failed to obtain approval from the Master for the Redistribution Agreement, and the Fourth and Fifth Respondents acted improperly in implementing it. The Court held that all transactions outside the Will were unauthorised and must be nullified. However, removal of the First Respondent as executrix was deemed unnecessary, as her primary function was to establish a Trust in terms of the Will. The administration of the estate must be restored to its position i…

Source excerpt

• Estate Administration
• Removal Of Executor
• Redistribution Agreement
• Will Interpretation
• Trust Registration
• Costs Order

Ortone v Belmer (41851/2015)

Ortone v Belmer (41851/2015) [2017] ZAGPPHC 80 (2 March 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

41851/2015

Judge

Gcabashe

The Court found that the deceased intended the Defendant to pay the Plaintiff R5000 per month from the income of his entire inheritance, not solely from Sunny Shades. The wording and context of the Will, as well as the use of 'inheritance' in multiple clauses, supported this interpretation. Even if the obligation were limited to Sunny Shades, the Defendant continued to operate the business and benefit from its assets under a new entity, Sun Cover Systems CC, which was deemed the alter ego of Sunny Shades. The Defendant's reliance on flawed financial statements and exaggerated debts was reject…

Source excerpt

• Conditional Bequest
• Will Interpretation
• Inheritance Obligation
• Specific Performance

Ganesan v Ramnadan and Others (45323.2013)

Ganesan v Ramnadan and Others (45323.2013) [2016] ZAGPPHC 509 (1 June 2016)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

45323.2013

Judge

Mullins AJ

The court found that the first respondent failed to establish a valid enrichment lien and did not exercise the option to purchase the property within twelve months of the deceased's death, as required by clause 3.3 of the Will. The Will's wording was interpreted to mean that the option period commenced upon death, not upon appointment of the executor or a later decision by the heirs. The first respondent's occupation was therefore unlawful. The requirements for eviction under PIE were satisfied, and the court determined that eviction was just and equitable in the circumstances. The counter-ap…

Source excerpt

• Eviction
• Administration Of Estates
• Will Interpretation
• Unlawful Occupation
• Enrichment Lien

Robbetze v Gouws and Others (37115/2015)

Robbetze v Gouws and Others (37115/2015) [2016] ZAGPPHC 246 (22 April 2016)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

37115/2015

Judge

C.P. Rabie

The court dismissed an application for accounting and maintenance, holding that insurance proceeds paid to a nominated beneficiary did not form part of the estate.

• Maintenance Claims
• Fiduciary Duty
• Insurance Policy Beneficiaries
• Estate Administration
• Interim Maintenance
• Will Interpretation