Ex Parte Sigogo (2025-117399) [2025] ZAGPPHC 769 (30 July 2025)

begin wrapper begin container begin header begin slogan-floater end slogan-floater - About SAFLII About SAFLII - Databases Databases - Search Search - Terms of Use Terms of Use - RSS Feeds RSS Feeds end header begin main begin center # South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria You are here: SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria >> 2025 >> [2025] ZAGPPHC 769 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## Ex Parte Sigogo (2025-117399) [2025] ZAGPPHC 769 (30 July 2025) Ex Parte Sigogo (2025-117399) [2025] ZAGPPHC 769 (30 July 2025) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPPHC/Data/2025_769.html sino date 30 July 2025 SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA CASE NO.: 2025-117399 (1)      REPORTABLE: NO (2)      OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO (3)      REVISED: NO Date: 30 July 2025 E van der Schyff In the Ex Parte application of MASHAU SIGOGO                                                                                                  Applicant In the matter between: MASHAU MAGOGO                                                                                                Applicant and ABSA BANK                                                                                                First Respondent LINDIWE MHLONGO N.O.                                                                    Second Respondent MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT                                                              Third Respondent THE ACCOUNT HOLDER OF ABSA ACCOUNT 9[...]                                                                             Fourth Respondent THE ACCOUNT HOLDER OF ABSA ACCOUNT 9[...]                                                                                Fifth Respondent JUDGMENT Van der Schyff J Introduction [1] This ex parte application was enrolled in the urgent court. Although the application was moved on an ex parte basis, five respondents were cited, to wit, ABSA Bank, Lindiwe Mhlongo in her capacity as the executrix of Estate Late M C Khumalo, the Master of the High Court, and two unknown entities that hold accounts with ABSA Bank. It is unequivocally stated in the founding affidavit that none of the respondents will be served with this application prior to its hearing. [2] The applicant seeks the preservation of all funds in the estate’s bank account and the two identified accounts of the unidentified entities. Additionally, she seeks copies of the bank statements of the three bank accounts for the past year. [3] An applicant approaching the court for relief must establish that they have the necessary locus standi to seek the relief. [4] The applicant states that she is an adult female attorney. The applicant avers that Ms. Mhlongo has mandated her to assist her in the administration of the deceased estate. Ms. Mhlongo allegedly ‘recently’ communicated to her that the estate’s bank account has been depleted of substantial amounts of money. The applicant obtained an order in this court directing ABSA to provide her with copies of the recent bank accounts, and she noticed that substantial amounts were paid out of the estate’s bank account, among others, to the two unknown entities respectively cited as the fourth and fifth respondents. The applicant does not know where Ms. Mhlongo currently resides, as she is ‘somewhere in the United States of America’, and is no longer answering phone calls from her legal practice. Ms. Mhlongo has adopted a dismissive attitude towards her law firm when she attempts to communicate with her. The tone of the email communication attached to the founding affidavit is indicative of a strained relationship. [5] The applicant avers that the relief sought in the notice of motion is intended to protect as much of the remaining money in the bank accounts as possible. [6] The applicant does not aver in the founding papers that she has the necessary locus standi to approach the court. She does aver that she has a prima facie right to the relief sought, and if she succeeds in proving a prima facie right to the relief sought, it will follow that she has the necessary locus standi . [7] The applicant avers as follows: ‘ As the attorney which has been mandated with assisting the Executrix of the estate in question with the estate’s administration, I feel well within my rights to request the relief sought as my duty extends beyond any personal interest in the estate of the 2 nd respondent. Firstly, there are other heirs to the estate and, secondly, I have a professional duty to see to it that the law is observed throughout the entirety of the administration of this estate.’ [8] It is evident from the founding affidavit that Ms. Mhlongo is the executrix of the deceased estate. She is also the person who opened the estate bank account and the only person, according to the applicant, who managed the account. By accepting the mandate to assist with the administration of the deceased estate, the applicant did not acquire any personal legal interest in the estate, much less a direct and substantial interest therein. [1] When a client gives a mandate to an attorney, it creates a principal-agent relationship. The attorney may be authorised to act on behalf of the client, but the rights and obligations concerned remain those of the client. The converse is also true: an attorney’s authority must come from the client, either expressly or by implication. [9] I am alive thereto that the Special Power of attorney authorizes the applicant, among others, to open bank accounts in the name of the deceased estate. In this matter, for reasons not placed before the court, the executrix opened the bank accounts and not the applicant. In this regard, the applicant was thus not assisting with the administration of the estate, except for specific instructions she received from the executrix. [10] The applicant failed to make out a case that she has locus standi. As a result, the application stands to be dismissed. ORDER In the result, the following order is granted: 1. The application is dismissed. E van der Schyff Judge of the High Court For the applicant:                                      Mr. M. Mavunda Instructed by:                                           Mavunda Attorneys Date of the hearing:                                  29 July 2025 Date of judgment:                                     30 July 2025 [1] See Brauer v Cape Liquor Licensing Board 1953 (3) SA 752 (C). sino noindex make_database footer start