VermeulenLaw Mobile Logo

Website Location : Home » Blog » Can Trustees Withhold Financial Documentation from Beneficiaries? – A Discussion on the Case of Mohle N.O and Others v R.L.N and Another

Call us: Mon – Fri 8:00am – 4:30pm

Can Trustees Withhold Financial Documentation from Beneficiaries? – A Discussion on the Case of Mohle N.O and Others v R.L.N and Another


In the case of Mohle N.O and Others v R.L.N and Another (A43/2023) [2024] ZAMPMBHC 1, the core issue revolved around the duties of trustees towards beneficiaries, specifically regarding the provision of financial statements and supporting documents of a trust. This case highlights the legal obligations of trustees in their fiduciary relationship with beneficiaries, and how these duties are interpreted and enforced by the courts.

Background of the Case

The case concerned a dispute over the financial statements of a trust, involving the trustees (Appellants) and the beneficiaries (Respondents). The First Respondent, representing her minor child and as the income beneficiary of the trust, requested the financial statements for the year ending 2019. Upon receiving these statements, discrepancies were noted in the loan amounts, leading to a request for supporting documents, which the Appellants refused to provide. This refusal prompted legal action and subsequent appeals, raising questions about the scope of trustees’ duties to account and provide supporting documentation to beneficiaries.

Legal Analysis

The Duty to Account

In this case, the duty of the trustees to provide a full and transparent accounting of the trust’s dealings was central. The court, drawing parallels with the Doyle case, emphasized that trustees have a substantive legal duty to justify their actions and conduct regarding the management of the trust (paragraph 15). This duty goes beyond mere bookkeeping; it requires trustees to offer complete clarity and justification for their decisions and actions concerning the trust’s assets.

Locus Standi and Enforceability

The court also addressed the issues of locus standi and the enforceability of the court order demanding documentation. It reaffirmed that the First Respondent, in her dual capacity, had the necessary standing to bring the application. Moreover, the court found no merit in the Appellants’ argument that the order was unenforceable due to the vagueness of the documents requested (paragraph 18).

Court’s Decision

Ultimately, the court dismissed the appeal, upholding the order of the lower court that the Appellants provide all supporting documents relating to the trust’s loan accounts for the specified financial year. This decision reinforces the principle that trustees must be transparent and accountable to beneficiaries, especially in the management and reporting of trust finances.

Memorable Quote

One striking quote from the judgment, which encapsulates the essence of a trustee’s duty, comes from paragraph 15: “It is not enough for him to say: ”Here are my books and vouchers – you are free to use them to make up your own accounts.” In addition, he is obliged to allow inspection by the principal of all relevant vouchers and entries in the agent’s books…”



Q1: What does this case say about a trustee’s duty to account?

A1: The case reinforces that trustees have a substantive duty to provide a full and transparent account of their management of the trust, including supporting documentation.

Q2: Can a trustee refuse to provide supporting documents for trust financial statements?

A2: As this case demonstrates, trustees are obliged to provide supporting documents when requested by beneficiaries, as part of their duty to account.

Q3: What is the significance of the doctrine of locus standi in this case?

A3: Locus standi refers to the legal standing to bring a case. In this matter, the court confirmed that the First Respondent had the necessary standing to request the trust’s financial documentation.

Q4: What does the term ‘enforceable order’ mean in the context of this case?

A4: An enforceable order is a court order that can be practically implemented. The court in this case found that the order to provide all supporting documents was specific and enforceable.


The Mohle N.O and Others v R.L.N and Another case is a pivotal reminder of the stringent duties imposed on trustees in their fiduciary role. Trustees are not only expected to manage trust assets prudently but also to ensure full transparency and accountability in their dealings, reinforcing the trust and confidence placed in them by beneficiaries.

- Contact Us -

Recent Articles

- Contact Us -