A Bank, a Ford Figo, and a Legal Lesson from Beyond the Grave

In the quiet corridors of the North West High Court in Mahikeng, a story unfolded that felt both deeply human and sharply legal. It’s a story about a Ford Figo, an elderly couple grieving their daughter, and a banking giant who, in the eyes of the law, tried to sue a ghost.

The court recently dismissed an application by FirstRand Bank to repossess a vehicle. The catch? The client, Lilian Dinekile Botsane, had passed away months before the bank even filed its summons.

A Contract Interrupted by Loss

Lilian Botsane bought her Ford Figo in October 2023, financed through the bank. She was diligent. At the time of her passing in January 2024, every instalment was paid on time. Her first missed payment came in Februarya direct result of her death, not neglect.

Yet, by August 2024, the bank had filed for repossession. In court, a poignant scene emerged. Botsane’s elderly parents, both in frail health, attended not as formal parties but to help the court understand the truth. Their daughter was gone. The bank’s lawyer, in a moment that laid bare the systemic failure, stated he had no knowledge of her death.

Acting Judge Tsakane Tsautse noted this wasn’t surprising. Summons had been sent to an old address. But, she ruled, this ignorance did not solve the bank’s fundamental legal problem.

Why You Can’t Sue the Departed

Judge Tsautse’s judgment provided a clear lesson in legal principle. “A person’s legal personality terminates upon death,” she stated. You cannot initiate or continue legal proceedings against someone who no longer has a juristic existence. The correct path is to pursue a claim against the deceased’s estate, through a properly appointed executor.

The bank’s entire case was built on a default that began in February 2024. But by then, Botsane had died. “The cessation of payments was not a breach of contract but a direct consequence of death,” the judge clarified. She could not default on an obligation she could no longer physically fulfil.

A Ruling for Compassion and Correct Process

The judge declared the bank’s application “legally incompetent and void.” It was struck from the roll. In a touch of measured fairness, the court made no order for costs against the bank, acknowledging it had acted without knowledge of the death and that service of documents appeared regular.

The ruling is more than a procedural win; it’s a shield for grieving families. It affirms that in the painful aftermath of loss, institutions must follow the dignified and prescribed channel of dealing with the estate, not pursue aggressive actions against a deceased individual.

For Lilian Botsane’s parents, the outcome brings a measure of relief from an added layer of distress. For the public, it’s a crucial reminder: the law sees a distinct line between life and death. Even the most powerful corporate entities must navigate the finality of that line with respect and correct legal procedure. The case of the Ford Figo stands as a small but significant testament to that principle.

{Source: IOL}

Follow Joburg ETC on Facebook, Twitter , TikTok and Instagram

For more News in Johannesburg, visit joburgetc.com