Related Research Articles
Primogeniture ( ) is the right, by law or custom, of the firstborn legitimate child to inherit the parent's entire or main estate in preference to shared inheritance among all or some children, any illegitimate child or any collateral relative. In most contexts, it means the inheritance of the firstborn son ; it can also mean by the firstborn daughter.
Forced heirship is a form of testate partible inheritance which mandates how the deceased's estate is to be disposed and which tends to guarantee an inheritance for family of the deceased.
The law of persons in South Africa regulates the birth, private-law status and the death of a natural person. It determines the requirements and qualifications for legal subjectivity in South Africa, and the rights and responsibilities that attach to it.
The South African law of succession prescribes the rules which determine the devolution of a person's estate after his death, and all matters incidental thereto. It identifies the beneficiaries who are entitled to succeed to the deceased's estate, and the extent of the benefits they are to receive, and determines the different rights and duties that persons may have in a deceased's estate. It forms part of private law.
South African family law is concerned with those legal rules in South Africa which pertain to familial relationships. It may be defined as "that subdivision of material private law which researches, describes and regulates the origin, contents and dissolution of all legal relationships between: (i) husband and wife ; (ii) parents, guardians and children; and (iii) relatives related through blood and affinity."
"As far as family law is concerned, we in South Africa have it all. We have every kind of family; extended families, nuclear families, one-parent families, same-sex families, and in relation to each one of these there are controversy, difficulties and cases coming before the courts or due to come before the courts. This is the result of ancient history and recent history [...]. Our families are suffused with history, as family law is suffused with history, culture, belief and personality. For researchers it's a paradise, for judges a purgatory."
Daniels v Campbell NO and Others, an important case in South African law, was heard in the Constitutional Court on 6 November 2003, with judgment handed down on 11 March 2004. The applicant was a woman married in terms of Muslim rites, whose husband had died intestate. The court noted that Muslim marriages were not recognised in South African law. It concluded that this violated section 9 of the Constitution. Accordingly, it was held that the applicant could inherit. The ambit of this judgment was restricted to de facto monogamous Muslim marriages; it was extended to polygamous Muslim marriages in Hassam v Jacobs. In this Context the word "spouses" was questioned
Bhe and Others v Magistrate, Khayelitsha and Others; Shibi v Sithole and Others; SA Human Rights Commission and Another v President of the RSA and Another was an important case in South African customary law.
South African company law is that body of rules which regulates corporations formed under the Companies Act. A company is a business organisation which earns income by the production or sale of goods or services. This entry also covers rules by which partnerships and trusts are governed in South Africa, together with cooperatives and sole proprietorships.
Insolvency in South African law refers to a status of diminished legal capacity imposed by the courts on persons who are unable to pay their debts, or whose liabilities exceed their assets. The insolvent's diminished legal capacity entails deprivation of certain of his important legal capacities and rights, in the interests of protecting other persons, primarily the general body of existing creditors, but also prospective creditors. Insolvency is also of benefit to the insolvent, in that it grants him relief in certain respects.
The facts of the case in Casey v The Master, an important case in the South African law of succession, the deceased and her husband were married in community of property and had a joint will, whereby both spouses bequeathed their half of the joint estate to each other. Being safety-conscious, each night the deceased's husband slept with a loaded revolver under his pillow. One night the revolver accidentally went off while the couple was sleeping; the bullet struck the deceased, who subsequently died. The deceased's husband was convicted of culpable homicide.
In Ex Parte Steenkamp and Steenkamp, an important case in the South African law of succession, Mr. and Mrs. K. bequeathed a farm and certain movable property to their children born and to be born of their daughter. Their son-in-law subsequently murdered Mr. and Mrs. K. At the time of their deaths, Mr. and Mrs. K's daughter and son-in-law had two children, and the daughter was pregnant with a third child. The nasciturus was born alive, but died when it was six months old. In terms of the Intestate Succession Act, Mr. and Mrs. K.’s daughter and son-in-law would inherit from their infant child.
Ex Parte Meier en Andere, an important case in South African succession law, concerned an application for the appointment of a curator bonis to manage the estate of a patient, one Armin Karel Meier. An order was also claimed that the patient was entitled to inherit from his father's estate. It appeared that the patient, while mentally disturbed, had on May 18, 1977, shot and killed his father, in "an apparently unmotivated, cold-blooded shooting." Utilising the maxim “waar daar geen skuld is nie, is daar geen stra nie”—where there is no fault, there is no punishment—the court held that the patient was not an indignus, and that he lacked the criminal responsibility to be found guilty of the crime. Accordingly, he was entitled to inherit from his father's estate.
In Danielz v De Wet, an important case in the South African law of succession, Danielz was the executor of De Wet's estate. Danielz sought an order declaring the deceased's widow unworthy of inheriting. The reason for this was that the widow had hired an accomplice to assault the deceased and as a result of the assault, the deceased died.
In Ex parte Stephens' Estate, an important case in the South African law of succession, the deceased disposed of his estate in terms of fractions, but only provided for nine tenths of the estate. One tenth, therefore, was not provided for. It was argued that it should be divided among the named beneficiaries in the will.
In Ex Parte Estate Davies, an important case in South African succession law, the testator bequeathed £2000 in his will to a person who was not named in the will itself, but on a document which was in a sealed envelope given to his attorney. This document was not signed by witnesses.
In Ex Parte Maurice, an important case in South African succession law, the facts were these: A few weeks before his death, the deceased forwarded a draft of his will in his own handwriting to a building society, along with a letter asking them to “knock this document into shape and finalise it in legal jargon.” The question before the court was whether it should exercise its discretion to declare the will valid, even though it had not been signed by any witnesses, etc. The court held that there are three requirements which must be fulfilled before condonation is given:
- The document must be drafted or executed by a person
- who has since died;
- and who intended the document to be his will.
In Ex Parte Lutchman, an important case in South African succession law, the deceased had left certain property to his six children in equal shares in a validly executed will. One of the deceased's children took out three life insurance policies on his father's life and explained to his father that in order for him to get the benefits of the policies when he died, he must draft a new will. The only provision in the second will was that the son was appointed the sole heir of the insurance policies, so he did not deal with any of the rest of his estate. Furthermore, he accidentally included a revocation clause in the new will, so its effect was that everything except the insurance policies devolved according to the law of intestate succession. At that stage, extra-marital children of persons marriage in terms of Hindu custom could not inherit intestate. The children of the deceased approached the court to declare the second will invalid insofar as it revoked the previous will. The court held that the revocation clause in the second will was obviously a mistake, so this clause was held to be pro non scripto.
In Van Zyl v Esterhuyse, an important case in the law of succession in South Africa, the applicant applied for the rectification of a joint will executed by herself and her deceased husband. The will appointed her as the sole heir subject to the conditions
Testate succession exists under the law of succession in South Africa.
Intestate succession in South African law takes place whenever the deceased leaves property which has not been disposed of by valid testamentary instrument. In other words, the law of intestate succession applies only:
References
- Ex Parte Graham 1963 (4) SA 145.
