How should co-executors of a deceased estate act?

“My mother and I have been appointed as co-executors of my late father’s estate. My mother wants to sell our family home, but I don’t want to. She has however gone ahead and signed a sale agreement without my consent. Can she do this and sell the house without my approval?”

Where immovable property has been acquired by a person during their lifetime and such person passes away, the property forms part of that person’s estate and must be administered according to his will. The deceased can nominate one or more persons in his will to administer his estate accordingly upon his death. Such a person is termed an “executor” and where there are two or more executors, they are referred to as co-executors. 

Co-executors must always act jointly as they are charged with the duty to properly administer the estate from start to finish. An executor therefore, may not enter into an agreement with a third party without the other co-executor. 

Our courts have accordingly held that where several executors are appointed each is responsible for the due administration of the estate. This means that co-executors must act jointly and are jointly responsible to carry out the wishes of the deceased, until the Master releases them from such duty. The relationship of co-executors is also different to that of a partnership. With a partnership a partner can act and sign a sale agreement on behalf of the others. In the case of co-executors, they must always act jointly as they are both equally responsible for the administration of the estate.

In your case it therefore means, that your mother cannot sell the family home without your consent and any agreement entered into will not be valid as she does not have the authority to bind the estate without your consent as co-executor.

December 14, 2021
Out with maternity leave, in with parental leave

Out with maternity leave, in with parental leave

A landmark judgment delivered on 3 October 2025 by the Constitutional Court of South Africa has reshaped the legal landscape governing employment and family rights. In Van Wyk and Others v Minister of Employment and Labour; Commission for Gender Equality and Another v Minister of Employment and Labour and Others (CCT 308/23) [2025] ZACC 20, the Court declared several provisions of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act 75 of 1997 (“BCEA”) and the Unemployment Insurance Act 63 of 2001 (“UIF Act”) invalid and inconsistent with the Constitution in that they unfairly discriminate between different classes of parents.

AI regulation on the horizon

AI regulation on the horizon

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming industries, and everyday life. We now live in an era where information cannot be trusted at face value, and content creation blurs the lines between reality and fiction. With such a dangerous capability literally at anyone’s fingertips, it is normal to wonder whether AI is being regulated in South Africa. In this article, we look at the current position regarding AI in South Africa.

The tax distinction between local and foreign dividends

The tax distinction between local and foreign dividends

Dividends from South African resident companies fall under the dividends tax regime and are subject to a 20% withholding tax in terms of section 64E of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 (“Act”), known as dividends tax, rather than normal income tax. In contrast, foreign dividends are included in a taxpayer’s gross income unless relief is available under section 10B of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962, which provides a full or partial participation exemption depending on certain circumstances. In this article, we unpack the important distinction in the tax treatment of local vs foreign dividends in South Africa.

Sign up to our newsletter

Pin It on Pinterest