Khoza&Associates

14/09/2024

07/08/2023

DISINHERITED SON CHALLENGES FATHER’S WILL
The deceased had a joint will that he and his late wife had executed in 1996. Under the old joint will, their sons, Jean-Paul and Shane Solomon, were both beneficiaries in equal proportions. The deceased’s wife died in 2004 and 16 years later, in 2020, the deceased executed a new will. In terms of the new will, he provided that the first respondent (Shane) would be the sole beneficiary and would be appointed as executor of the estate. Applicant (Jean-Paul) seeks to have the will declared inexecutable so that he can inherit from the estate in terms of the rules of intestate succession. First respondent brought a counter application to have the will accepted by the Master even though it does not comply with all the formalities of section 2(1) of the Wills Act 7 of 1953…

HOFMEYR AJ discusses that while the applicant and the deceased’s relationship was deteriorating, the first respondent and his family played a significant role in caring for the deceased; that when the deceased signed the new will he was not in good health; that the deceased asked the first respondent to call his wife and daughter (who lived with them in the family home) to come to his room; they did so and then signed the will together in the presence of the deceased; the first respondent was not in the room at the time…

The three witnesses were not in each other’s presence at the time that they signed the will. The court is satisfied that the document purporting to be the deceased’s will was drafted by the deceased and intended by him to be his will. Section 2(3) of the Wills Act creates a power for the courts to order that the Master accept a document as valid. Because first respondent’s wife witnessed the will, in terms of sections 4A(1) and (3) of the Wills Act, he is therefore disqualified from inheriting from the estate of the deceased under the will and from being appointed as executor. The exception to this disqualification is under section 4A(2)(a) if the court is satisfied that that person or his spouse did not defraud or unduly influence the testator in the ex*****on of the will. The court is satisfied that neither the first respondent nor his wife defrauded or unduly influenced the deceased in the ex*****on of his will. On the contrary, the papers reveal that the first respondent and his family cared for the deceased at the times in his life when he most needed his family’s support.

The Master is ordered to accept the document by the Mr Solomon as his last will and testament although it does not comply with all the formalities under section 2(1) of the Wills Act. Shane Solomon is declared to be competent to receive any benefit under the will, including being appointed as the executor of the will. Jean-Paul Solomon is ordered to pay the costs of the application and counter application.

Solomon v Solomon and Another (17909/2022) [2023] ZAWCHC 182 (20 July 2023)

1 This is a case about two brothers and an inheritance. The applicant was disinherited from their father’s will. He seeks to have the will declared inexecutable so that he can inherit from the estate in terms of the rules of intestate succession.

04/08/2023

Good day,

Kindly note that Thembekile Khoza’s facebook account has been hacked. Please do not entertain anything from that account

Regards,
Khoza and Associates

04/07/2020

Our office is giving you a chance to ensure that your estate is distributed according to your desires should you die.

We a drafting will for free for the month of July

Consultation via Ms Teams and you can collect the original from our office

Book an appointment at 073 168 6592
Or email : [email protected]

27/05/2020

18/05/2020

11CA of the Disaster management act prohibits evictions during this period of lockdown it reads as follows ; No person may be evicted from their place of residence. Regardless of whether it is a formal or informal or informal residence or a farm dwelling for the duration of the long down

This means that, even if the landlord is in possession of an eviction order, cannot execute/action the eviction order for the duration.

However a landlord can instruct an attorney to commence with the eviction process as attorneys are permitted to prepare an order for eviction, which may be granted during level 4. However, the order is suspended and cannot be executed until such time as regulations allow orders to be executed.

The clause in terms of regulation 11CA does not automatically excuse a tenant from paying rent and in a case where the tenant willfully doesn’t pay rental ,the aforementioned regulation does not leave the landlord without a claim/relief, the landlord can claim arrear rental through an order of a rental tribunal or court and commence with the eviction process.

If the Tenants income is affected during the period of lockdown and as a result the tenant can not pay full rental and or pay rental during the period of the lockdown tenant shall negotiate a payment holiday ,repayment plan or reduction of rental for this period. However tenants who can no longer afford the rental to retrenchment have an option to obtain alternative accommodation (I.e. through a family member) and are encouraged refer to the direction of once-off movement of person and transportation of goods for the purpose of relocation, in terms of this revised regulations movement of a person and goods which are limited to household furniture and effects is permitted between the periods of 7May to 7 June 2020.

Tenants are also cautioned to consider the negative effects an eviction will have on their credit score .