Page:Gory v Kolver (CC).djvu/4

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
Van Heerden AJ

7.

The applicant is entitled to occupation of the property mentioned in 6 above, on condition that he pays the monthly bond instalments and the municipal account for rates, taxes, water and electricity.

8.

The first second and third respondents jointly and severally, the one complying the other to be absolved, are directed to return the items on X2, as amended by me,[1] to the applicant. This order has immediate effect.

9.1[2]

The first respondent is removed as executor from the estate of the late Henry Harrison Brooks. This order is suspended pending confirmation of the orders in 1, 2 and 3 above.

9.2

Save as specifically dealt with in this order the administration of the estate of the late Henry Harrison Brooks is suspended pending confirmation of the order in 1, 2, 3 and 4[3] above.

10.

The first respondent is not entitled to remuneration for his services in connection with the administration of the aforesaid estate or to be reimbursed for expenses. This order is suspended pending confirmation of 1, 2, 3 and 4[4] above.

11.

The first respondent is ordered de bonis propriis to pay half of the costs of the applicant and the second and third respondents, jointly and severally, the one paying the other to be absolved, are ordered to pay the other half of the costs of the applicant. This order is suspended pending confirmation of the orders in 1, 2, 3 and 4[5] above.”

[5] The Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development, the seventh respondent in the court a quo, caused an answering affidavit to be filed in that court stating that the application was moot because of the decision of this Court in Minister


  1. X2, as amended by Hartzenberg J, is a list of movables belonging to the deceased and/or to Mr Gory which were removed from Mr Gory’s possession after the deceased’s death by the first, second and third respondents and members of the deceased’s family. These movable assets were still in the possession of the first, second and/or third respondents at the time the court order was made.
  2. Both this paragraph and the next one were numbered 9 in the order of the High Court. I have numbered them 9.1 and 9.2 to avoid confusion.
  3. In terms of section 172(2)(a) of the Constitution, para 4 of the order of the High Court does not need to be “confirmed”, whereas paras 1, 2 and 3 have no force unless they are confirmed by this Court. The same applies to the reference to para 4 of the order of the High Court in paras 10 and 11 of that order.
  4. Id.
  5. Id.

4