The second respondent, Wollie’s evidence Wollie testified that deceased’s 1994 will was drafted in accordance with deceased’s late husbands will. He accompanied the deceased to the bank where the will was drafted and there deceased who said she trusted him and that he was honest asked him to inform the bank manager the will should be drafted as ‘how your late father explained to you how the will should look like’. The deceased had then said are at least honest’ and that she trusted him. He was taken through ‘you that will clause by clause to confirm the bequests made therein. He said after his father’s death the livestock he left was sold. Wollie was next asked to comment on the evidence given by Dr Burger, Dr Sieberhagen, and by Frikkie and Engela. On Dr Burger’s testimony that he had noted in his clinical notes in 1993 that deceased had severe anxiety with loss of concentration, he said concentrated good enough on anything’ and later said ‘she could have been that she had severe stress, because of financial difficulties’. On ‘it Dr Burger’s evidence that in 1994 he noted that the anxiety had started to affect deceased’s general appearance; that she had started to neglect her usual spotless make up; that her clothes were neglected, he said does not exist’. He went on ‘that to say he recalled that deceased had started neglecting her clothes she ‘when lived with my brother Gawie’ not before that (Gawie started living with deceased in 1994). He added was not herself’. Then there were some questions about Dr ‘she Burger’s evidence that he knew deceased and her late husband, he had visited them in 1995, that they had been very good to their cattle, but deceased sold ‘had the stud’. Wollie agreed that they had sold some cattle in 1995. Asked why they
The second respondent, Wollie’s evidence Wollie testified that deceased’s 1994 will was drafted in accordance with deceased’s late husbands will. He accompanied the deceased to the bank where the will was drafted and there deceased who said she trusted him and that he was honest asked him to inform the bank manager ‘how the will should be drafted as your late father explained to you how the will should look like’. The deceased had then said ‘you are at least honest’ and that she trusted him. He was taken through that will clause by clause to confirm the bequests made therein. He said after his father’s death the livestock he left was sold. Wollie was next asked to comment on the evidence given by Dr Burger, Dr Sieberhagen, and by Frikkie and Engela. On Dr Burger’s testimony that he had noted in his clinical notes in 1993 that deceased had severe anxiety with loss of concentration, he said ‘she concentrated good enough on anything’ and later said ‘it could have been that she had severe stress, because of financial difficulties’. On Dr Burger’s evidence that in 1994 he noted that the anxiety had started to affect deceased’s general appearance; that she had started to neglect her usual spotless make up; that her clothes were neglected, he said ‘that does not exist’. He went on to say he recalled that deceased had started neglecting her clothes ‘when she lived with my brother Gawie’ not before that (Gawie started living with deceased in 1994). He added ‘she was not herself’. Then there were some questions about Dr Burger’s evidence that he knew deceased and her late husband, he had visited them in 1995, that they had been very good to their cattle, but deceased ‘had sold the stud’. Wollie agreed that they had sold some cattle in 1995. Asked why they
Vemeulen%20v%20Vermeulen%20(SA%2005-2012)[2014](31%20March%202014).docx