22 Apr: LJ Re MLI-CM: Re: Case Enrollment.

* Marais Law Inc, Charl Marais.
* 22 Apr: LJ Re MLI-CM: Re: Case Enrollment.
* Tygae: EoP Leg Sub: LJ v GME  / EoP NWO SCO: EoP NTE GM: EoP NTE GMZA| EoP Axis MilNec Evac: Lotto: EoP v WiP Law, EoP v WiP  Academia, EoP v WiP Media, EoP v WiP Charity, / EoP v WiP Neg.

From: Lara Johnson [mailto:eop-leg-sub@tygae.org.za]
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 8:48 PM
To: ‘Marais Law Inc: Charl Marais’
Subject: Re: 542/21: MLI Re: Case Enrollment Meeting.

.

TO: Marais Law Inc: Charl Marais:

Charl Marais:

Re: 542/21: MLI Re: Case Enrollment Meeting.

I received your 22 April email [22 Apr: MLI-CM: Re: Case Enrollment.]

MLI-CM: Marais Law Inc: Charl Marais
EoP-LJ: Ecology of Peace: Lara Johnson

**

MLI-CM: This matter must be placed on the opposed Motion Roll. The Magistrate allocates dates for that Roll. If Tuesday, 27 April 2021 was not a public holiday, we would have met at Court on that morning, and the Magistrate would then have postponed the matter to a suitable date on the postponed Motion Roll.

MLI-CM: Under the circumstances we must either meet at the Magistrate’s office to discuss the matter with her and agree on a suitable date, or a representative of our office will call at the Magistrate’s office, obtain a date and we will then notify you of the date upon which the matter will be heard.

**

EoP-LJ: If I am interpreting you accurately; you are suggesting:

[A] that the case enrollment date – if that is the right legalese name – remain on 27 April 2021;

[B] the case enrollment hearing occur – as if in court on 27 April 2021 – with the Magistrate in chambers for the magistrate to place the case for hearing on the opposed Motion Roll;

[C] The case enrollment with the magistrate in chambers can occur either [i] with both of us present to agree on a suitable date; or [ii] with a representative of your office visiting the Magistrates office to obtain a date.

Is that an accurate interpretation of what you are recommending?

If that is an accurate interpretation of what you are recommending:

We can meet at the Magistrate’s office to discuss the matter with her and agree on a suitable date.

I am on a bicyle, so let me know date and times available for a meeting.

Transparency Disclosure:

My date request to the Magistrate will be 08 June 2021.

Reason: I have almost finished Notice in Terms of S36 of the Administrations of Estates Act: Failure to perform bona fide fair minded objective S32 Disputed claims executor duties.

In Case No: 3426/14: SNS v Master Kwazulu Natal High Court, PMB; Judge Moodly states: “[26] In Van Niekerk v Van Niekerk, Wallis J recognised that the executor is not a mere agent for the heirs nor does he represent the creditors of the estate. He is given custody and control of all the property in the estate and, when considering claims against the estate, he is obliged to exercise the powers conferred on him, in particular under Sections 32 (disputed claims) and 33 (rejected claims), bona fide and with a measure of objectivity. He held further: ‘However, where it is apparent from the executor’s conduct that it is their purpose and intent to use the office to resist all claims, or all claims from a particular source, irrespective of their merits and without any fair-minded consideration thereof, that may, in my view, constitute good cause for their removal in terms of s 54(1)(a)(v). That view would be strengthened where the motive was to secure personal financial benefit in their capacity as heirs. The office of executor should not be used in order to pursue a private agenda.’”

If the Executor performs a bona fide fair minded objective S32 Disputed claims enquiry; then such enquiry will provide both sides information to enable them to make a more fully informed decision as to proceed or concede.

If one or both sides concede; the 08 June hearing will be a settlement agreement made order of court hearing.

In my opinion an out of court settlement agreement is always preferable to a judges ruling.

One of the reasons I admire Adv Gauntlett [In February the justices of the court heard argument in the matter. Zuma’s counsel‚ Jeremy Gauntlett SC‚ surprised all when he abandoned Zuma’s dogged defiance and said the president wanted to bring the matter to a close. He said Zuma would pay back a portion of the Nkandla expenses that were found to be unrelated to security. Sowetan: An end to Nkandla politicking expected]

Its also possibly one of the reasons he gets paid as much as he does, cause his advice to his clients is always: take responsibility, which means in the long run he saves his clients money.

EoP – OKC TRC – Axis Alliance [31 Mar: EoP Upd: Sergey Lavrov: Re: EoP Axis Alliance negotiations] Honest Lives Matter [29 Jun: EoP Axis Alliance is an Honest Lives Matter culture] Negotiations correspondence is published at EoP Leg Sub [eop-leg-sub.tygae.org.za]

Respectfully,

Lara Johnson,
EoP MILED Clerk [EoP Oath PDF]
16 Taaibos Ave, Heatherpark, George, 6529

Sent per electronic notice to:

Marais Law Inc: Charl Marais:
Marais Law Inc: Charl Marais (charl@marais-law.com)

.

4 Comments

    1. […] I have consented to you arranging a meeting with the magistrate; with both of us present to agree on a suitable date [22 Apr: LJ Re MLI-CM: Re: Case Enrollment]. […]

    1. […] TO: Marais Law Inc: Charl Marais: CC: The One Financial Solution: Marlise Steenekamp: Ref: 22 Apr: LJ Re MLI-CM: Re: Case Enrollment […]

Leave a Comment