Ex Parte Ncamiso N.O

The applicant, Nolusindiso Ncamiso N.O, is the duly appointed executrix of the deceased estate of her father, Mziwetemba Solani. The deceased operated a taxi business and was murdered on 29 November 2023. His wife, Ms Voyolwethu Solani, was also murdered on 10 February 2024. The Master of the High Court issued Letters of Executorship to the applicant on 27 May 2024. At the time of his death, the deceased owned approximately 18 taxis, generating an average income of R40,000 per week. The applicant alleged that unknown individuals had taken possession of the vehicles and were collecting the income from the taxi business to the prejudice of the estate. The estate had defaulted on monthly instalments for some of the taxis in the amount of R250,776.25. The applicant approached the High Court on an ex parte basis seeking a warrant in terms of section 26(3) of the Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965 for the search and seizure of the deceased's vehicles.

• Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to hear an application for a search and seizure warrant brought in terms of section 26(3) of the Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965.
• Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction to grant a warrant under section 26(3) despite the section specifically designating the magistrate's court as the forum.

The applicant's application was struck off the roll. No cost order was made.

Where a statute — here, section 26(2) and 26(3) of the Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965 — explicitly designates a specific forum (the magistrate's court) for a particular type of application (an application for a search and seizure warrant by an executor), the High Court will not entertain the application, and its inherent jurisdiction does not extend to overriding the clear legislative intention of Parliament.

The court accepted that the High Court enjoys inherent jurisdiction but opined that the exercise of this inherent jurisdiction must not encroach upon the authority of the magistrate's court, as such action would undermine the legislative authority of Parliament.

This case clarifies the jurisdictional boundaries between the High Court and the magistrate's court under the Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965. It affirms that section 26 is a self-contained procedural mechanism requiring executors to approach the magistrate's court for search and seizure warrants. The judgment reinforces the principle that the High Court's inherent jurisdiction cannot be invoked to bypass statutory provisions that specifically assign jurisdiction to a lower court.