Jooste NO and Another v Pretorius and Others

The Rhino Pride Foundation is a public charitable trust established to protect and conserve rhinos, largely funded (about 90%) by a single foreign donor. Dr Jana Annelise Pretorius, the founder and a trustee, was accused by her co-trustees, Tersia Jooste NO and Jens Lievens NO, of destructive conduct including mismanagement of trust affairs, making false statements under oath to obtain an ex parte court order, excluding co-trustees from trust administration, misleading employees and donors, and jeopardising donor funding. Following a breakdown in relations and donor confidence, the remaining trustees adopted a resolution in terms of clause 11.1.5 of the trust deed requiring Pretorius to resign as trustee. Pretorius approached the High Court for an interdict to prevent enforcement of the resolution, while the trustees counter-applied for enforcement of the resolution or her removal under the Trust Property Control Act 57 of 1988.

The appeal succeeded with costs. The High Court’s order was set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the respondent’s application and granting the counter-application. The resolutions of 3 March 2022 requiring Dr Pretorius to resign as trustee and appointing a replacement trustee were declared valid and enforceable. Pretorius was ordered to resign within seven days, failing which the Sheriff was authorised to act. Costs were awarded against the respondent in her personal capacity.

The case clarifies the enforceability of trust deed provisions allowing trustees to require the resignation of a fellow trustee, confirms that such decisions are not administrative action under PAJA, and emphasises that trustees must act in the best interests of the trust and its beneficiaries. It underscores that courts will uphold trustee removal where a trustee’s conduct is destructive and jeopardises trust administration and funding, and it reinforces the limits of relying on constitutional fair-hearing rights in internal trust governance disputes.