Ras NO and Others v Van der Meulen and Another

The appellants, trustees of the Bokfontein Trust, were sued by the respondent, Nicoline Van der Meulen, who alleged that she was a capital beneficiary of the trust and sought their removal for alleged maladministration, as well as an investigation by the Master under s 16 of the Trust Property Control Act 57 of 1988. The trustees denied that she was a beneficiary, relying on a 1999 resolution purportedly removing her as such. The High Court held that even if she was not a beneficiary, she had sufficient interest to seek relief and ordered the Master to investigate. The trustees appealed.

Appeal upheld in part; the High Court order was set aside and replaced with an order referring the matter to the High Court for the hearing of oral evidence to determine whether the respondent is a beneficiary of the Bokfontein Trust or was validly removed as such. Costs of the appeal were ordered to be costs in the cause.

The case clarifies that only beneficiaries have standing to seek removal of trustees and confirms that courts cannot direct the Master to conduct investigations under s 16 of the Trust Property Control Act. It also illustrates appellate restraint where factual disputes regarding beneficiary status have not been properly determined.