CaseNotes LogoCaseNotes
  • Home
  • Library
  • Research
  • Discussion Hub
  • Wiki
  • Latin Dictionary
  • Question Bank
  • Settings
S

Student

Student Account

South African Law • Jurisdictional Corpus
HomeLibraryResearchQuestionsSettings
Judicial Precedent
Ask AI

Tshaka NO & others v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited & another

Citation(141/2019) [2020] ZASCA 73 (25 June 2020)
JurisdictionZA
Area of Law
Trust LawBanking Law
Free account

Get the most out of this judgment

Create a free CaseNotes account to save this case, see how it's cited, get an AI summary, and search 10,000+ SA judgments.

Create free accountor sign in
Contract Law
Law of Negligence

Facts of the Case

The appellants were four trustees of the Bakubung-Ba-Ratheo Economic Development Trust, established in 2006 with a R10 million donation from Wesizwe Platinum Limited to advance the socio-economic development of the Bakubung-Ba-Ratheo community. The Trust opened a bank account with Standard Bank. The Trust deed authorized banking transactions to be conducted by one authorised person, and a 2007 resolution appointed Nyasa Tengawarima and Choice Franscina Tshetlhe as authorised signatories. On 21 July 2011, these two signatories instructed the Bank to transfer R5.5 million from the Trust's account to the Bakubung Economic Development Unit. The Bank approved and effected the transfer on 26 July 2011. On 17 October 2011, trustee Jabulani Gumbi informed the Bank that the transfer was made without proper authorization and requested that further transfers be stopped. The Bank advised that a written request signed by all trustees was required. On 24 October 2011, before such instruction was received, the Bank received another instruction from the same two authorised signatories to transfer R4 million, which was effected on 28 October 2011. Only on 6 December 2011 did the Trust provide a resolution removing the two signatories. The trustees sued the Bank for recovery of R9.5 million.

Legal Issues

  • Whether the Bank acted negligently in authorizing transfers from the Trust's bank account on the instructions of authorised signatories
  • Whether the Bank was required to obtain resolutions from all trustees before effecting transfers
  • What standard of care a bank owes to a trust when acting on instructions from authorised signatories
  • Whether the Bank was obliged to investigate the authority of signatories or consult the Trust deed before effecting transfers
  • The requirements for trustees to act jointly in binding the trust estate

Judicial Outcome

The appeal was dismissed with costs.

Ratio Decidendi

A bank is not liable for transferring funds from a trust account when acting on instructions from authorised signatories properly appointed by the trust, even where one trustee objects, unless and until the bank receives a written instruction signed by all trustees revoking the authority of those signatories or stopping the transfers. A bank is entitled to continue relying on existing authorised signatories until formally notified otherwise by all trustees acting jointly. In the absence of contrary provision in the trust deed, trustees must act jointly if the trust estate is to be bound by their acts. A bank does not act negligently by insisting on joint action by all trustees before varying the mandate given to it by the trust through properly appointed signatories.

Obiter Dicta

The court made observations about the nature of trusts in South African law, reiterating that a trust is not a legal person but a legal relationship of a special kind, a legal institution sui generis. The court noted that it is only through trustees, as specified in the trust instrument, that a trust can act, and who the trustees are, their number, how they are appointed, and the circumstances under which they have power to bind the trust estate are matters defined in the trust deed, which is the trust's constitutive charter. The court also observed that the fundamental rule requiring trustees to act jointly derives from the nature of trustees' joint ownership of trust property and has been enforced in South African law since 1848, forming the basis of trust law for over a century and a half.

Legal Significance

This case is significant for clarifying the duties and liabilities of banks when dealing with trust accounts in South African law. It establishes that banks are entitled to rely on properly appointed authorised signatories to a trust account and are not required to investigate the internal decision-making processes of the trust or consult the trust deed before every transaction. The case reinforces that where a bank is alerted to potential irregularities, it acts appropriately by requiring formal written instructions from all trustees before making changes to account signatories or stopping transactions. The judgment protects banks from liability where they follow proper banking procedures and act on valid instructions from authorised signatories, unless and until those authorizations are formally revoked by all trustees acting jointly. It also emphasizes the fundamental principle that trustees must act jointly to bind the trust estate, and that delays in providing proper joint instructions can result in the trust bearing responsibility for unauthorized transactions. This case provides important guidance on the balance between a bank's duty to its customer (the trust) and its entitlement to rely on mandates properly given to it.

Case relationship graph

Case Network

Explore 2 related cases • Click to navigate

Current Case
Related Case

Cases Cited in This Judgment

  • Joan Cynthia Griessel NO & others v Harold Lee De Kock(334/18) [2019] ZASCA 95 (6 June 2019)
    Cites

    Cited for the definition of a trust as a legal institution sui generis.

  • N K v Minister of Safety and Security2005 (6) SA 419 (CC) [also reported as 2005 (8) BCLR 661 (CC); Case CCT 52/04]
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that a trust is not a legal person but a legal relationship of a special kind.

  • Taljaard and Another v The Land and Agricultural Development Bank of South Africa and Others(161/2025) ZASCA 29 (17 March 2026)
    Applies

    Applied to establish that a trust can only act through its trustees and that trustees must act jointly to bind the trust estate in the absence of a contrary…

Cited By 85 Cases

  • AB and Another v Pridwin Preparatory School and Others[2020] ZACC 12
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that mootness is not an absolute bar to deciding an issue where the interests of justice require it be decided.

  • ABSA Bank Limited v Lombard Insurance Company Limited; Firstrand Bank Limited v Lombard Insurance Company Limited(629/2011) [2012] ZASCA 139
    Cites

    Cited for the proposition that the relationship between a bank and its customer is one of debtor and creditor.

  • Afgri Operations Limited v Hamba Fleet (Pty) Limited(542/2016) [2017] ZASCA 24 (24 March 2017)
    Cites

    Cited for considerations applicable to business rescue proceedings.

  • AIG South Africa Limited v 43 Air School Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Others(640/2023) [2024] ZASCA 97 (13 June 2024)
    Distinguishes

    Court distinguishes this decision which held summons can constitute a demand, finding it does not apply to the reporting requirements of the insurance policy…

Practice This Case

Sign up to practise IRAC analysis, issue spotting, and argument building on this case.

  • Amardien and Others v Registrar of Deeds and Others[2018] ZACC 47
    Applies

    The court cites Kubyana for the proposition that one of the main aims of the NCA is to enable previously marginalised people to access credit, which must be…

  • Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union and Others v Chamber of Mines of South Africa and Others[2017] ZACC 3
    Follows

    Applied for principles of statutory interpretation.

  • Bata Limited v Face Fashions CCCase number: 206/98
    Applies

    Applied to establish that the use of a mark in conjunction with another word does not constitute use of an identical mark.

  • Beadica 231 CC and Others v Trustees for the time being of the Oregon Trust and Others[2020] ZACC 13
    Considers

    Supreme Court of Appeal decision interpreting Barkhuizen; held that Barkhuizen is authority for the proposition that where a constitutional value is limited by…

  • Blue Chip 2 (Pty) Ltd t/a Blue Chip 49 v Cedrick Dean Ryneveldt & 26 Others(499/15) [2016] ZASCA 98 (03 June 2016)
    Applies

    Applied to explain the purpose of a s 129 notice as establishing a framework for resolving disputes without recourse to courts.

  • Central Developments Tshwane (Pty) Ltd and Another v Body Corporate of Twee Riviere Aftree Oord2020] ZASCA 107; Case no: 635/2019
    Considers

    Mentioned for its differing approaches in majority and minority judgments on ratification, which the court notes should be considered when the issue of…

  • Christoffel Petrus Wolmarans N O and Others v The Standard Bank of South Africa Limited(416/2023) [2025] ZASCA 150 (14 October 2025)
    Applies

    Applied the principle that compliance with s 129(1)(a) notice is compulsory before legal proceedings can commence.

  • City of Johannesburg v Changing Tides 74 (Pty) Ltd and 97 others (The Socio-Economic Rights Institute of South Africa intervening as amicus curiae)(735/2011) [2012] ZASCA 116 (14 September 2012)
    Applies

    Applied for the principle that joinder is called for whenever a party has a direct and substantial interest in the outcome of litigation.

  • Cohen N O & Others v Deans(368/2022) [2023] ZASCA 56 (20 April 2023)
    Considers

    Court considers whether a technical defect due to manifest error causing no prejudice to the defendant can be overlooked in summary judgment proceedings.

  • C W v G T(867/2021) [2023] ZASCA 23 (13 March 2023)
    Applies

    Applied to establish that in a delictual action based on fraudulent misrepresentation, it is sufficient that the representee acted upon the false…

  • Democratic Alliance and Another v Electoral Commission of South Africa and Others[2024] ZAEC 06 (26 April 2024)
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that the fact that a party has decided not to empower certain actions cannot change the meaning of the Act and Regulation.

  • Destri Joseph Malcolm Ferris and Another v FirstRand Bank Limited and Another(CCT 52/13) [2013] ZACC 46
    Cites

    Cited for the proposition that the National Credit Act's purposes are connected to the Constitution's commitment to achieving equality, establishing this…

  • Dines Chandra Manilal Gihwala and Others v Grancy Property Ltd and Others(20760/2014) [2016] ZASCA 35 (24 March 2016)
    Cites

    Court cites the majority judgment for the principle that a loan prohibited by section 226 is void ab initio and incapable of ex post facto ratification.

  • Edwards v FirstRand Bank Limited t/a Wesbank(20734/14) [2016] ZASCA 144 (30 September 2016)
    Applies

    Court applies the principle that consumers may not unreasonably ignore the consequences of electing to receive notices at a nominated address where they will…

  • Elsie Gundwana v Steko Development CC and Others(CCT 44/10) [2011] ZACC 14
    Considers

    Considered as one of various High Court interpretations of Jaftha with inconsistent outcomes.

  • Emontic Investments (Pty) Ltd v Bothomley NO and Others(1123/2022) [2024] ZASCA 1 (9 January 2024)
    Applies

    Applied for the principle that section 83 imposes a peremptory and unequivocal duty upon a creditor who disposes of security, and a liquidator does not have a…

  • Falk and Another v National Director of Public Prosecutions(CCT 95/10) [2011] ZACC 26
    Cites

    Cited to support that our courts do not endorse an approach that elevates form above substance.

  • Fidelity Security Services (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Police and Others2021] ZASCA 51; Case no: 1349/2019
    Cites

    Cited for confirming the approach that statutory interpretation must consider text, context and purpose simultaneously.

  • First National Bank of Southern Africa Ltd v Barclays Bank PLC and AnotherCase No 118/02
    Cites

    Cited in relation to the issue of potential infringement if 'Premier' is registered and used by another bank.

  • First Rand Bank Limited v Brera Investments CC2013 (25) ZASCA 25; Case No: 385/2012
    Cites

    Cited in support of the fraud exception to the autonomy of payment guarantees.

  • FirstRand Bank Limited v Lourina Wilson N.O. and another(373/2024) [2025] ZASCA 149 (10 October 2025)
    Considers

    Considered for the principle that an application for leave to execute against a deceased estate's property in terms of section 30(b) is premature if section 29…

  • Four Wheel Drive Accessory Distributors CC v Leshni Rattan N O(1048/17) [2018] ZASCA 124 (26 September 2018)
    Cites

    Cited to explain that Barkhuizen did not hold that enforcement of contractual terms must be fair and reasonable where no public policy consideration is…

  • Government of the Republic of South Africa v Thabiso Chemicals (Pty) Ltd(148/2007) [2008] ZASCA 112 (25 September 2008)
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that in cases of implied representation by conduct, the enquiry is whether the implication can be said to be justified.

  • Grobler v Oosthuizen(299/2008) [2009] ZASCA 51
    Considers

    Considered as an earlier decision expressing support for the outright cession with pactum fiduciae theory, now overtaken by the pledge theory.

  • Grupo Bimbo S.A.B. DE C.V. v Takis Biltong (Pty) Ltd(293/2022) [2023] ZASCA 175 (14 December 2023)
    Cites

    Cited for the rule that a matter which is not intrinsic to the mark and has no trade mark significance must be excluded from the comparison.

  • Hassody Katha v Primathie Pillay N.O. and Others(276/2024) [2025] ZASCA 106 (18 July 2025)
    Distinguishes

    Court distinguishes the Beningfield exception allowing beneficiaries to claim in exceptional circumstances where executor cannot or will not act, finding no…

  • Head of Department, Department of Education, Free State Province v Welkom High School and Others[2013] ZACC 25
    Cites

    Cited for the proposition that subordinate legislation may not be used to interpret primary legislation.

  • Inkatha Freedom Party v The Electoral Commission(001/11) [2011] ZAEC 1 (20 April 2011)
    Cites

    Cited as an example where courts have set their face against placing form above substance.

  • Investec Bank Limited t/a Investec Private Bank v Mavungu David Ramurunzi(445/13) [2014] ZASCA 67
    Cites

    The court cites this Constitutional Court judgment for the principle that delivery of a s 129 notice is peremptory and deals with delivery of s 129 notices.

  • KwaZulu-Natal Joint Liaison Committee v Member of the Executive Council, Department of Education, KwaZulu-Natal and Others[2013] ZACC 10
    Cites

    Cited for principles applicable to interpreting written documents as a whole having regard to context and background.

  • Land and Agricultural Bank of South Africa v J L Parker and OthersCase no: 186/2003
    Cites

    Cited for the proposition that an outsider dealing with a trust has a manifest interest in ensuring trustees have authority to encumber trust property, also…

  • Leon Ferdinand Smuts v Wilfred Booyens; Markplaas (Edms) Bpk and Leon Ferdinand Smuts v Wilfred BooyensSaaknr: A/222/99 en 257/99
    Applies

    The court applies this case for the principle that a stipulation against cession is part and parcel of the agreement creating the right, and the right is…

  • Lester v Ndlambe Municipality[2013] ZASCA 95 (22 August 2013); Case No: 514/12
    Cites

    Cited in connection with the preceding WCC judgment on the same matter concerning the doctrine of legality and demolition orders.

  • Louis N O and Others v Fenwick N O and Others(598/2021) [2023] ZASCA 59 (28 April 2023)
    Cites

    The court cited this case for the principles of statutory interpretation requiring a sensible meaning to be preferred.

  • Maphango and Others v Aengus Lifestyle Properties (Pty) Ltd(611/10) [2011] ZASCA 100
    Distinguishes

    Cited by the SCA for the proposition that motive for exercising a contractual power is generally irrelevant, but applicants submit that Bredenkamp recognises…

  • Mashilo Shadrack Sebola and Another v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited and Another(CCT 98/11) [2012] ZACC 11
    Considers

    One of the conflicting single-judge decisions holding that proof of postage to the correct address constitutes compliance for purposes of sections 129(1) and…

  • Mawanda Makhala and Another v The State(438/20) [2021] ZASCA 19 (18 February 2022)
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that the value of demeanour evidence should not be exaggerated.

  • McCarthy Retail Ltd v Shortdistance Carriers CCCase No. 110/99, Supreme Court of Appeal, delivered 16 March 2001
    Applies

    Applied for the principle that in assessing whether defendant has been enriched by payment, account must be taken of any performance rendered by defendant…

  • Member of the Executive Council, Department of Education, Eastern Cape v Komani School & Office Suppliers CC, t/a Komani Stationers(1417/2018) [2022] ZASCA 13 (26 January 2022)
    Applies

    Court applies the caution that ordinary meaning and clear language may not be discarded and interpretation is not divination; courts must respect separation of…

  • Member of the Executive Council for Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, KwaZulu-Natal v Nkandla Local Municipality and Others[2021] ZACC 46
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that a court has discretion to determine a moot matter if the interests of justice require it.

  • Mhlari NO and Others v Nedbank Limited(251/2023) [2024] ZASCA 39 (4 April 2024)
    Applies

    Applied to establish the elements of the condictio indebiti and the requirement that mistake must be reasonable and excusable.

  • Minister of Police v Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Council and OthersCase no: PA 13/2023
    Follows

    The Labour Appeal Court judgment is followed for the proposition that a review court must not substitute its own view and that the test requires the result to…

  • Minister of Transport and Public Works, Western Cape v Zanbuild Construction (Pty) Ltd(68/2010) [2011] ZASCA 10 (11 March 2011)
    Applies

    Court applies this case to interpret the effect of notice of termination in suretyship for indefinite period regarding liability for amounts owing prior to…

  • Minmetals Logistics Zhejiang Co Ltd v The Owners and Underwriters of the MV 'Smart' and Another(573/2023) [2024] ZASCA 129 (1 October 2024)
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that words in statutes are to be given their ordinary general meaning that will apply to all cases falling within the ambit of the…

  • Mlamli Baliso v Firstrand Bank Limited t/a Wesbank[2016] ZACC 23
    Applies

    Applied to clarify Sebola and confirm that a credit provider must show on balance of probabilities that the section 129 notice reached the consumer and that…

  • Mohamed's Leisure Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Southern Sun Hotel Interests (Pty) Ltd(183/17) [2017] ZASCA 176 (1 December 2017)
    Applies

    Court applies Harms DP's interpretation that enforcement of a valid contractual term need not be fair and reasonable if no public policy consideration found in…

  • Moipone Moroka v Premier of the Free State Province and Others(295/2020) [2022] ZASCA 34 (31 March 2022)
    Cites

    Court cites this case on the principles of statutory interpretation, that the logical point of departure is the language of the provision itself in light of…

  • Moshomo Levin Kubyana v Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd(CCT 65/13) [2014] ZACC 1
    Appeal From

    The Constitutional Court granted leave to appeal to clarify the interpretation of section 129 of the National Credit Act and the application of its previous…

  • Mostert v Firstrand Bank Limited t/a RMB Private Bank(198/2017) [2018] ZASCA 54 (11 April 2018)
    Applies

    Applied to explain the purpose of section 129(1) of the National Credit Act as facilitating consensual resolution of credit agreement disputes and balancing…

  • Municipal Employees Pension Fund v Mongwaketse(969/2019) [2020] ZASCA 181 (23 December 2020)
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that in assessing enrichment, account must be taken of any performance rendered by the defendant juridically connected with receipt of…

  • National Credit Regulator v National Consumer Tribunal and Others (BMW Financial Services, Volkswagen Financial Services, Mercedes-Benz Financial Services matters)(667/2023) [2025] ZASCA 132 (12 September 2025)
    Cites

    Cited for the proposition that the lack of clarity in the drafting of the National Credit Act has been bemoaned, and that the Act must be interpreted to give…

  • National Credit Regulator v Opperman(CCT 34/12) [2012] ZACC 29
    Cites

    Cited for the proposition that the main objective of the NCA is to protect consumers, but the interests of credit providers should not be minimised or…

  • NBS Boland Bank v One Berg River Drive and Others; SB Deeb and Another v ABSA Bank Ltd; AL Friedman v Standard Bank of South Africa LtdCase nos 291/98, 428/98 and 85/99 (Unreported, Supreme Court of Appeal, 10 September 1999)
    Appeal From

    Appeal from Gihwala AJ's decision granting summary judgment and finding mortgagee's power limited by banking practices; appeal dismissed.

  • Ndamase v Functions 4 AllCase No 100/2003
    Applies

    Court applies the principle that the magistrates' court has no jurisdiction and powers beyond those granted by the Act.

  • Nedbank Limited v Houtbosplaas (Pty) Ltd and Another(164/2021) [2022] ZASCA 69
    Cites

    Cited for the principle that interpretation involves considering the text, context, and purpose of a provision.

  • Ntombizodwa Yvonne Maphango (now Mgidlana) and 17 Others v Aengus Lifestyle Properties (Pty) Ltd
    Applies

    Applied for the principle that motive is generally irrelevant in the exercise of a contractual right and that reasonableness and fairness are not freestanding…

  • Explore More Cases

    More Trust Law cases

    • Allan Aubrey Boesak v The StateCase No 105/99 (SCA) [Judgment delivered 12 May 2000]
    • Badenhorst v BadenhorstCase no: 7/05
    • Basil Mutizwa Mapfumo and Others v Tinashe Osmond Mapfumo and OthersHB 350-17, HC 2624-15
    • Bellepaise Estate (Pvt) Ltd v Mai-Kai-Real Estate Development Trust and Bernard Mahara MutangaHH 395-16, HC 4178/11
    • Blucher Hauman Mellet N O and Others v Marais Rocco Vermeulen and Another(1049/2021) [2022] ZASCA 176 (07 December 2022)
    • BoE Trust Limited NO and Others (in their capacities as co-trustees of the Jean Pierre De Villiers Trust 5208/2006)(846/11) [2012] ZASCA 147 (28 September 2012)
    • Bonugli v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited(266/11) [2012] ZASCA 48 (30 March 2012)
    • Brand v Brand and Another[2024] ZAWCHC 116

    More South Africa cases

    • 3M South Africa (Pty) Ltd v The Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service(272/09) [2010] ZASCA 20 (23 March 2010)
    • 4 Seasons Logistics CC v Kgotse(1215/2023) [2026] ZASCA 09 (04 February 2026)
    • 4 Seasons Logistics CC v Nicholas Ngwanammoto Kgotse(1215/2023) [2026] ZASCA 09 (4 February 2026)
    • 4-Tune Investments (Pty) Ltd v Kingsgate Body CorporateCSOS 4565/WC/22 (Adjudication Order, 29 November 2023)
    • 68 Wolmarans Street Johannesburg (Pty) Ltd and Others v Tufh Limited(1263/2022) [2024] ZASCA 48 (15 April 2024)
    • 9 on Rydal Vale Court Body Corporate v Pan African Holdings Pty LtdCSOS-4563/KZN/23 (Adjudication Order, 8 November 2023)
    • AAA Investments (Proprietary) Limited v The Micro Finance Regulatory Council and Another
    2006 (11) BCLR 1255 (CC) (also reported as CCT 51/05)
  • A A Alloy Foundry (Pty) Limited v Titaco Projects (Pty) LimitedCase No. 309/97