Gafin v Kavin
| Gafin v Kavin | |
|---|---|
| Court | Witwatersrand Local Division |
| Full case name | Gafin NO v Kavin |
| Decided | 2 May 1980 |
| Citation(s) | 1980 (3) SA 1104 (W) |
| Court membership | |
| Judge sitting | Esselen J |
| Case opinions | |
| Decision by | Esselen J |
| Keywords | |
| Heir, Unworthiness, Joint will, Succession, Mental illness | |
Gafin NO v Kavin, an important case in South African succession law, concerned an application for a declaratory order. AJ Horwitz for the applicant; LI Goldblatt appeared as curator ad litem. The applicant's attorneys were Singer, Horwitz & Robin.
Facts[edit]
A husband and wife (Mr and Mrs Kavin) had a joint will, executed on March 8, 1971, and registered and accepted by the Master on July 13, 1977, saying that he and she were the sole heirs. On June 7, 1977, the husband murdered his wife, Denise, and two of their children, Adelle and Lance Jay; the third, Debbie-Ann, was shot through the head and blinded for life, but survived. Kavin was intent on killing himself as well: His family, he said, "would re-unite in heaven." He failed and was duly charged with three counts of murder and one count of attempted murder.
The trial court found that, because Kavin was mentally ill, he was incapable of acting in accordance with an appreciation of the wrongfulness of his acts at the time of their commission. He therefore lacked criminal capacity, and was not criminally responsible in terms of section 78(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act.[1] He was found not guilty but was detained in prison pending the decision of the State president.
The respondent and his wife had executed a joint will, under which it was provided that, in the event of the wife's predeceasing the respondent, he was to be the sole and universal heir of the deceased and the wife's estate. The executor in the estate of the deceased applied for an order declaring that the respondent was unworthy to inherit from his late wife and late children.
Judgment[edit]
The court held that the applicant's contention that a person who could appreciate the wrongfulness of his act was to be regarded as being unworthy, notwithstanding the fact that he could not act in accordance with such appreciation, was untenable. The court decided, accordingly, in view of the trial court's finding, that the applicant had not shown that the respondent was disqualified from acquiring any benefits in terms of the deceased's will. Accordingly, he was entitled to inherit.
See also[edit]
References[edit]
- Gafin NO v Kavin 1980 (3) SA 1104 (W).
Notes[edit]
- ↑ Act 51 of 1977.
 | This article relating to case law in South Africa is a stub. You can help EverybodyWiki by expanding it. |
This article "Gafin v Kavin" is from Wikipedia. The list of its authors can be seen in its historical and/or the page Edithistory:Gafin v Kavin. Articles copied from Draft Namespace on Wikipedia could be seen on the Draft Namespace of Wikipedia and not main one.
