The Dispute Over Ginimbi’s Estate Continues

The Dispute Over Ginimbi's Estate

The Dispute Over Ginimbi’s Estate Continues

The High Court has given a thumbs up to halt the late Genius Kadungure’s legal counselor Patricia Darangwa from distributing Ginimbi’s estate.

The judgment comes after Ginimbi’s family headed by his sister Juliet’s filed an urgent chamber application to stop Darangwa from acting as Ginimbi estate’s executrix.

The family declared that the will was not authenticated by Ginimbi neither was the finished paperwork furnished for them to acknowledge it.

In her discovering, Justice Sylvia Chirawu-Mugomba said the family’s privileges should be secured.

“Even if the court finds on the return date that the document should be taken as a will, their rights must be protected,” concluded Justice Chirawu-Mugomba.

“The Master of High Court be and is hereby interdicted from accepting any process in relation to the administration of the estate of the late Genius Kadungure under DR No. 1771/20 filed by or on behalf of Darangwa.

Darangwa be and is hereby interdicted from presenting the letters of administration issued to her in Zimbabwe under DR No.1771/20 to the Master of the High Court in the Republic of South Africa for purposes of the administration of the deceased’s estate in relation to assets in that country.

The Registrar of the High Court of Zimbabwe at Harare is directed to expedite the return date hearing,” read the judgment.

The judge said her choice was inescapable since the contested record neglected to meet all conventions.

“It is therefore inevitable that the merits of the final order sought be considered. It is my considered view that the basis of the whole matter revolves around the crucial issue of the acceptance of a document that did not meet all the formalities as specified in s 8 (1) (a-d) of the Wills Act as the will of the deceased.

These are writing, signing and attestation. Section 8(5) therefore becomes an exception to the norm in that it gives the Master of High Court, the power to accept a document that does not meet some of the formalities.

“That section in my view seeks to create a balance between being overly rigorous to the extent that it may prejudice beneficiaries in instances where it is clear that indeed the deceased wanted their estate to be dealt with in a particular manner but failed but failed to comply fully s 8(1) and potential fraudulent documents being touted as wills,” states the judgment.

The family questioned the authenticity of the will which they claim is inexplicit and not dated.

 

Other Stories You May Be Interested In:

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*