Maryna holds the BA, LLB, LLM degrees and is a Director at the Cape Town branch of STBB. She is an admitted Attorney, Notary Public, Conveyancer and Insolvency Practitioner with many years of experience in the fields of property law, conveyancing and the laws relating to corporate compliance (especially in respect of the FICA and POPIA laws). Up until 2018 she was also head of the firm’s national marketing portfolio. She is a seasoned public speaker and presenter, both in person and online. She prepares text for the majority of STBB’s internal and external publications and is editor and co-writer for two pivotal publications in the South African real estate industry – the ABC of Conveyancing (JUTA) and Delport’s South African Property Law and Practice (JUTA).

Property Law Update | Issue 02 – 2023

NOT QUITE A BENEFICIARY OF A TRUST: NO LOCUS STANDI FOR ORDER TO SEE ACCOUNTS

N and Others v Maluleke N.O and Others (5983/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 911 (25 November 2022)

There are many permutations in trust deeds regarding the way in which the beneficiaries shall be identified. In the trust deed relevant to this matter, the trustees were given an absolute discretion to choose beneficiaries from a certain list.

If you are on this list and not identified by trustee resolution as a beneficiary, would you nonetheless have a right to ask that the bank accounts of the trust had to be frozen and the trust accounting records provided to you? No, said the Court here, as the applicant had no locus standi in this event. (The judgment is a good reminder too of how powerful a tool a trust deed is. Trust founders should ensure that their legitimate wishes are correctly recorded therein and a court will give effect thereto.)

The Judgment
Summary of the Judgment

ABSENCE OF SPOUSE’S CONSENT FOR BANK LOAN: WHAT NOW?

Rooplal N.O. v Pelesa (22424/2019) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1 (10 January 2023)

This judgment is a reminder that if someone seeks to apply for a loan, ticks a box in the application form stating “unmarried” and signs an affidavit to that effect, he cannot cry foul afterwards because his spouse’s consent was not obtained as required in terms of the law. The lending bank in this judgment showed that it performed its own internal checks and that there was no information to indicate that the borrower was married. The borrower’s claim that the loan was invalid, was accordingly rejected.

The Judgment
Summary of the Judgment

For the best legal advice and personalised service, let's talk
Subscribe to our monthly newsletters, subscribe