Nxaba v Nxaba
| Jurisdiction | South Africa |
| Court | Appellate Division |
| Judge | Innes CJ, Solomon JA, Wessels JA, JER De Villiers AJA and Stratford AJA |
| Judgment Date | 01 April 1926 |
| Citation | 1926 AD 392 |
| Hearing Date | 01 April 1926 |
Innes, C.J.:
The action was brought by two exempted natives against their father for an account of the estate of their mother, whose intestate heirs they claimed to be. They alleged that, 10, years after the marriage of their parents by Christian rites, both parents obtained statutory letters of exemption, and they contended that the effect of those letters was to subject their parents to the common law, so as to bring their marriage within the operation of the doctrine of community. The allegations as to marriage and as to the issue of letters of exemption were admitted by the defendant, but all the allegations in the declaration were not admitted, nor had an agreed statement of facts been filed. Before the trial, the Natal Provincial Division, on the application of the plaintiffs, made an order by consent directing that the point of law whether the grant of letters of exemption to the defendant and his wife ten years after their marriage created any community of property between them either as to property then possessed by either of them or as to...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
-
SA Eagle Versekeringsmaatskappy Bpk v Harford
...v Fisher's Executors 1914 AD 424; Union Government (Minister of the Interior) and Registrar of Asiatics v Naidoo 1916 AD 50; Nxaba v Nxaba 1926 AD 392; Shacklock v Shacklock 1949 (1) SA 91 (A); C Titus v Shield Insurance Co Ltd 1980 (3) SA 119 (A); Arthur v Bezuidenhout and Mieny 1962 (2) S......
-
Constantia Insurance Co Ltd v Nohamba
...the appeal off the roll, on behalf of the respondent, relied on the cases H of Dickinson v Fisher's Executors 1914 AD 424; Nxaba v Nxaba 1926 AD 392 and Umfolozi Co-operative Sugar Planters Ltd v SA Sugar Association 1938 AD 87. None of these cases governs the present matter. In Dickinson's......
-
Van Streepen & Germs (Pty) Ltd v Transvaal Provincial Administration
...consent C of both parties-the Court in Dickinsons's case did not decide or dispose of any part of the relief sought. In N xaba v N xaba 1926 AD 392 a preliminary point of law was decided in favour of the plaintiffs who sought relief in the form of a statement of account. This ruling was ana......
-
Santam Bpk v Van Niekerk
...v Moonsamy 1932 NPD 202: gevolg/followed Ndh/ovu v Pietennaritzburg Municipality 1964 (3) SA 538 (N): gevolg/followed Nxaba v Nxaba 1926 AD 392: verwys na/referred to Priday tla Pride Paving v Rubin 1992 (3) SA 542 (C): verwys na/referred to F Rehman v Bux 1947 (3) SA 187 (N): gevolg/follow......
-
SA Eagle Versekeringsmaatskappy Bpk v Harford
...v Fisher's Executors 1914 AD 424; Union Government (Minister of the Interior) and Registrar of Asiatics v Naidoo 1916 AD 50; Nxaba v Nxaba 1926 AD 392; Shacklock v Shacklock 1949 (1) SA 91 (A); C Titus v Shield Insurance Co Ltd 1980 (3) SA 119 (A); Arthur v Bezuidenhout and Mieny 1962 (2) S......
-
Constantia Insurance Co Ltd v Nohamba
...the appeal off the roll, on behalf of the respondent, relied on the cases H of Dickinson v Fisher's Executors 1914 AD 424; Nxaba v Nxaba 1926 AD 392 and Umfolozi Co-operative Sugar Planters Ltd v SA Sugar Association 1938 AD 87. None of these cases governs the present matter. In Dickinson's......
-
Van Streepen & Germs (Pty) Ltd v Transvaal Provincial Administration
...consent C of both parties-the Court in Dickinsons's case did not decide or dispose of any part of the relief sought. In N xaba v N xaba 1926 AD 392 a preliminary point of law was decided in favour of the plaintiffs who sought relief in the form of a statement of account. This ruling was ana......
-
Santam Bpk v Van Niekerk
...v Moonsamy 1932 NPD 202: gevolg/followed Ndh/ovu v Pietennaritzburg Municipality 1964 (3) SA 538 (N): gevolg/followed Nxaba v Nxaba 1926 AD 392: verwys na/referred to Priday tla Pride Paving v Rubin 1992 (3) SA 542 (C): verwys na/referred to F Rehman v Bux 1947 (3) SA 187 (N): gevolg/follow......