Uncertainty About the Condonation of Formally Non-Compliant Wills, and the Rectification of Cross-Signed Mirror Wills: Is an Act-Based Model the Solution?

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2022/v25i0a12691

Keywords:

Act of testation, act-based model, condonation, law of succession, rectification , testator's intention

Abstract

A recent contribution proposed a processual act-based approach to conceptualising wills in South African law. This approach regards a will as the product of a will-making process in which various parties perform specific acts with specific associated forms of intention in order to establish a will. The act-based model also paves the way for the introduction of an intent doctrine in South African law. This article tests the functioning of the proposed act-based model by applying it to two scenarios: the condonation of formally non-compliant wills in terms of section 2(3) of the Wills Act and the rectification of cross-signed mirror wills in terms of the common law. Both scenarios continue to be plagued by uncertainty as a direct consequence of the lack of a proper definition, explanation and contextualisation of testator's intention in South African law. Regarding condonation, it is found that, because the courts are often left guessing or speculating as to testator's intention, they inevitably overemphasise other aspects such as the form of the document to establish intention for the purposes of condonation in terms of section 2(3). An act-based model could ensure that the decision to condone or not to condone relies solely on whether the document embodies the act of testation. If the act of testation is found to be present (no matter in which shape or form, or by whom it was drafted), the document embodying such an act should be condoned. In terms of rectification, in turn, the act-based model highlights the important distinction between content and formality – the act of testation as opposed to compliance with the statutory formality requirements through the execution of a will. It appears that rectification is appropriate only where an error has caused a discrepancy between the testator's true intention and the intention as expressed in the act of testation contained in the will. Rectification seems less appropriate when dealing with cross-signed wills, which are the result of a flawed execution process. Instead, condonation is much better suited for correcting the formal non-compliance of cross-signed wills.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bibliography

Literature

Corbett MM, Hofmeyr G and Kahn E The Law of Succession in South Africa 2nd ed (Juta Cape Town 2001)

De Waal MJ "Testamentary Formalities in South Africa" in Reid KGC, De Waal MJ and Zimmermann R (eds) Comparative Succession Law: Testamentary Formalities (Oxford University Press Oxford 2011) 381-403 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199696802.003.0016

De Waal MJ "The Law of Succession (Including Administration of Estates) and Trusts" 2016 Annu Surv SA L 959-975

De Waal MJ and Schoeman-Malan MC Law of Succession 5th ed (Juta Cape Town 2015)

Du Toit F "Rektifikasie (en Kondonasie?) van Verkeerdelik-Ondertekende Testamente" 2008 Obiter 329-338

Du Toit F "Is Rektifikasie van 'n Dokument Gekondoneer Ingevolge Artikel 2(3) van die Wet op Testamente Moontlik?" 2010 De Jure 149-157

Du Toit F "Testamentary Rescue: An Analysis of the Intention Requirement in Australia and South Africa" 2014 APLJ 56-82

Du Toit F "Remedying Formal Irregularities in Wills: A Comparative Analysis of Testamentary Rescue in Canada and South Africa" 2020 OUCLJ 139-162 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14729342.2020.1773017

Faber JT "A Conceptual View of the Act of Testation to Elucidate a Testator's Intention in the South African Law of Succession: A Proposed 'Act-Based Model' as Opposed to the Traditional 'Requirements Model' (Part 1)" 2021 TSAR 504-520 DOI: https://doi.org/10.47348/TSAR/2021/i3a5

Faber JT "A Conceptual View of the Act of Testation to Elucidate a Testator's Intention in the South African Law of Succession: A Proposed 'Act-Based Model' as Opposed to the Traditional 'Requirements Model' (Part 2)" 2021 TSAR 740-753 DOI: https://doi.org/10.47348/TSAR/2021/i4a5

Faber JT and Rabie PJ "Die Behoefte aan ʼn Wyer Artikel 2(3) van die Wet op Testamente 7 van 1953 (Soos Gewysig): ʼn Kritiese Beskouing" 2004 TRW 198-203

Jacobs J "Cross-Signed Wills" 2011 De Rebus 34-37

Jamneck J et al The Law of Succession in South Africa 3rd ed (Oxford University Press Cape Town 2017)

Jamneck J "Testeerbevoegdheid, Animus Testandi, Testeervryheid, Bedoeling en die 'Bedoeling' Ingevolge Artikel 2(3) van die Wet op Testamente (1)" 2008 THRHR 603-612

Jamneck J "Die Anomalie Veroorsaak deur die Uitleg van Artikel 2(3) van die Wet op Testamente in Bekker v Naude 2003 5 SA 173 (HHA): Giles v Henriques 2008 4 SA 558 (K)" 2009 THRHR 502-507

Kerridge R Parry and Kerridge: The Law of Succession 13th ed (Sweet & Maxwell London 2016)

Martyn JGR et al Theobald on Wills 8th ed (Thomson Reuters London 1927)

Schoeman-Malan et al "Section 2(3) of the Wills Act 7 of 1953: A Retrospective and Critical Appraisal of Some Unresolved Issues" 2014 Acta Juridica 78-103

Sonnekus JC "Videotestamente Naas Skriftelike Testamente" 1990 TSAR 114-133

Wiechers NJ Testamente: 'n Kortbegrip (Juta Cape Town 1988)

Wood-Bodley MC "Suicide Notes, Wills, Testamentary Capacity, and s 2(3) of the Wills Act 7 of 1953: Smith v Parsons NO; Henriques v Giles NO" 2011 SALJ 612-620

Case law

Aubrey-Smith v Hofmeyr 1973 1 SA 655 (C) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.48.8.655-b

Back v The Master of the Supreme Court 1996 2 All SA 161 (CC)

Bekker v Naude 2003 5 SA 173 (SCA)

Botha v The Master 1976 3 SA 597 (EC)

Dryden v Harrison (WCC) (unreported) case number 11912/17 of 20 May 2019

Ex parte Estate Davies 1957 3 SA 471 (N)

Ex Parte Lutchman 1951 1 SA 125 (T)

Ex parte Maurice 1995 2 SA 713 (CC)

Ex parte Williams: In re Williams's Estate 2000 4 SA 168 (T) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-90789-2_6

Giles v Henriques 2008 4 SA 558 (CC) DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00151234-200805580-00008

Henriques v Giles 2010 6 SA 51 (SCA)

In the Estate of Hennekam (dec'd) 2009 104 SASR 289

In the Goods of Hunt 1875 LR 3 P & D 250

Marais v The Master 1984 4 SA 288 (D)

Marley v Rawlings 2015 AC 129

Oosthuizen v Die Weesheer 1974 2 SA 434 (O)

Osman v Nana (37220/2018) [2019] ZAGPJHC 161 (3 May 2019) DOI: https://doi.org/10.46674/1377-025-000-007

Osman v Nana 2021 JOL 50242 (GJ)

Smith v Parsons 2010 4 SA 378 (SCA)

Taylor v Taylor 2012 3 SA 219 (ECP) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199290802.003.0010

Van der Merwe v The Master 2010 6 SA 544 (SCA)

Van Wetten v Bosch 2004 1 SA 348 (SCA)

Webster v The Master 1996 1 SA 34 (D) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15615324.1996.10432173

Legislation

Administration of Justice Act, 1982

Wills Act 7 of 1953

Published

09-03-2022

How to Cite

Faber, J. (2022). Uncertainty About the Condonation of Formally Non-Compliant Wills, and the Rectification of Cross-Signed Mirror Wills: Is an Act-Based Model the Solution?. Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal, 25, (Published 9 March 2022) pp 1 – 21. https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2022/v25i0a12691

Issue

Section

Articles

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.