3. REPUDIATION BY A DESCENDANT UNDER SECTION 1(6) VS SECTION 1(7) AND DISQUALIFICATION OF AN UNWORTHY HEIR (INDIGNUS)

Map of Problem-Solving Steps for Succession Law, Repudiation vs Disqualification

• Factual Trigger: 

• Step 1: Identification of the Legal Issue

• Step 2: Scope, Applicable Law, and Factual Context

• Step 3: Concept and Voluntary Nature of Repudiation

• Step 4: Common-Law Maxim De Bloedige Hand Neemt Geen Erf

• Step 5: Concept and Operation of Unworthiness (Indignus)

• Step 6: Mechanics of Voluntary Repudiation with a Surviving Spouse (Section 1(6))

• Step 7: Mechanics of Repudiation without a Spouse (Section 1(7))

• Step 8: Mechanics of Involuntary Disqualification (Section 1(7))

• Step 9: Application and Outcomes for Bypassed vs Representing Heirs (Casey NO v The Master 1992)

Factual Trigger for Repudiation vs Disqualification Question

An adult child of a deceased person either voluntarily repudiates their intestate share in writing or is legally disqualified from inheriting because they committed a crime or killed the deceased.

Step 1: Identification of the Legal Issue

The legal issue here is whether a repudiated or disqualified intestate share devolves upon the surviving spouse under Section 1(6) of the Intestate Succession Act 81 of 1987 or passes by representation to the descendant's own children under Section 1(7).

Step 2: Scope, Applicable Law, and Factual Context

As such, This matter concerns/ requires the application of the statutory mechanics governing repudiation and unworthiness (indignus) because an adult child of the deceased either voluntarily renounced their intestate inheritance or was convicted of intentionally killing the deceased.

Step 3: Concept and Voluntary Nature of Repudiation

Repudiation is the voluntary, explicit, written refusal of an inheritance by a competent heir. Once repudiation is communicated to the executor, it is final and irrevocable, and the repudiating heir is legally barred from claiming the benefit.

Step 4: Common-Law Maxim De Bloedige Hand Neemt Geen Erf

Under the ancient common-law maxim de bloedige hand neemt geen erf (the bloody hand takes no inheritance), any person who unlawfully and intentionally causes the death of the deceased or their close relatives (coniunctissimi) is automatically disqualified from taking any benefit from the estate (Ex parte Steenkamp 1948).

Step 5: Concept and Operation of Unworthiness (Indignus)

Disqualification is an involuntary legal bar stripping an unworthy person (indignus) of legal capacity to inherit due to unlawful or morally despicable conduct.

Unworthiness is personal to the wrongdoer, meaning it affects only the disqualified individual and does not taint their innocent descendants (Casey NO v The Master 1992).

Step 6: Mechanics of Voluntary Repudiation with a Surviving Spouse (Section 1(6))

Under Section 1(6) of the Intestate Succession Act 81 of 1987, if a descendant voluntarily repudiates an intestate benefit and the deceased is survived by a surviving spouse, the repudiated share accrues automatically to the surviving spouse. The repudiating descendant's own children are completely bypassed.

Step 7: Mechanics of Repudiation without a Spouse (Section 1(7))

Under Section 1(7) of the Intestate Succession Act 81 of 1987, if a descendant repudiates an intestate benefit and there is no surviving spouse, the repudiating heir is deemed to have predeceased the deceased, and their share passes to their own descendants per stirpes by representation.

Step 8: Mechanics of Involuntary Disqualification (Section 1(7))

Under Section 1(7) of the Intestate Succession Act 81 of 1987, a disqualified heir is legally deemed to have predeceased the deceased.

Their share passes directly to their own lineal descendants by representation per stirpes, regardless of whether a surviving spouse exists.

Step 9: Application and Outcomes for Bypassed vs Representing Heirs (Casey NO v The Master 1992)

Section 1(6) applies strictly to voluntary repudiation and NEVER to disqualification.

If an adult child murders a parent, Section 1(6) does not apply; instead, under Section 1(7) and Casey NO v The Master 1992, the murderer is deemed predeceased, allowing their innocent children to inherit by representation per stirpes.