B
JUDICIAL MEASURES
483.
In the case of Re Wills and Administration of Testate Estates Act
between Isaac Tantameni Chali (Executor of the Will of the Late
Mwalla Mwalla) v. Liseli Mwalla (SCZ Judgement No. 6 of 1997),
the executor appealed against an order of the High Court varying the
terms of the deceased’s will. The testator had made no provision for the
respondent and her brother. The trial judge relied on the provisions of
Section 20 (1) of the Wills and Administration of Testate Estates Act,
which states that if, upon application made by or on behalf of a
dependant of the testator, the Court was of the opinion that the testator
had not made reasonable provision, whether during his lifetime or by his
will, for the maintenance of the dependant, and that hardship would
thereby be caused, the Court may, notwithstanding the provisions of the
will order that such reasonable provision as the Court thinks fit shall be
made out of the testator’s estate for the maintenance of that dependant.
484.
The Supreme Court held that the respondent was in law not covered by
the definitions of ‘dependant’ or ‘child’.
Section 3 of the Act defines
dependant to mean a wife, husband, child or parent, and although the
term ‘child’ is not defined in the Act, the age of a minor is given as a
person who has not attained the age of 18.
181
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents