A re-evaluation of what constitutes “property” for purposes of the Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the current omission of a definition of “movable property” in the Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965 (hereafter the Administration of Estates Act) is problematic and, if so (and with reference to related legislation), how can this situation be addressed? The study found that the most important classification of things is immovable and movable things. In addition, the Administration of Estates Act defines both immovable property and property, although movable property is not defined in the Administration of Estates Act. In other words, it would be necessary to consult either the definition of property or of immovable property, in order to determine which property forms part of an estate in terms of the Act or to consult court cases. The Administration of Estates Act is the principal act when it comes to the administration of a deceased estate. The undescriptive definition of “property” creates uncertainty and results in academics and practitioners using the Estate Duty Act 45 of 1955 (hereafter the EDA) to define property. Furthermore, the word “property” is constantly in use in the Administration of Estates Act. Although movable property should be self-explanatory, it appears to create problems which even the courts are struggling to define. It is concluded that property is constantly changing in modern society. With the constant change in modern society it is imperative to amend the outdated and undescriptive definition of “property” in the Administration of Estates Act.