Pitso v Old Mutual Life Assureance (064205/2024) [2025] ZAGPJHC 917 (11 September 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: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg You are here: SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg >> 2025 >> [2025] ZAGPJHC 917 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## Pitso v Old Mutual Life Assureance (064205/2024) [2025] ZAGPJHC 917 (11 September 2025) Pitso v Old Mutual Life Assureance (064205/2024) [2025] ZAGPJHC 917 (11 September 2025) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPJHC/Data/2025_917.html sino date 11 September 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NO : 2024 DATE : 2025-09-03 (1) REPORTABLE: NO. (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO. (3) REVISED: YES DATE 11/9/2025 In the matter between PALESA PRINCESS PITSO                                           APPLICANT and OLD MUTUAL LIFE ASSURANCE Respondent JUDGMENT FISHER, J : This is an application which is brought by the applicant in two capacities, f i rst, in her personal capacity and, second, in her capacity as an executrix of the estate of the deceased in issue in this matter. The application has glaring difficulties. The first being it is form .The claim is f ramed on the basis that i t is an interdict .The second i s that a clear dispute of fact has been raised in relation to the claim . The claim against is brought against Old Mutual, on the basis of a life insurance policy over the deceased . Old Mutual alleges that there is no proof of death and accordingly it disputes the death which is the basis upon which the death entitlement is claimed f rom Old Mutual. Furthermore, there are also disputes in relation to whether proper and t rue information was provided by the applicant in relation to her completion of the form when she took out the insurance policy in issue. The existence of the disputes of fact have been clear since the answering affidavit was filed. In these circumstances, to my mind, the applicant should not have persisted with the application . The disputes are i r resoluble on paper and this has been clear f rom the filing of the answering affidavit. There is a jurisdictional point raised which I am not going to deal with in l ight of the other overwhelming aspects which relate to the matter. I also do not want to prejudge i t on the basis that there may be a further process f i led in the matter. In these circumstances the application is dismisse d with costs on the basis that there is a dispute of fact with costs on scale B. FISHER ,J JU D G E O F TH E HIG H C OU RT DATE : 11 Se p tember 20 2 5 sino noindex make_database footer start