Racist fund appeal dismissed

Should one be able to create bursaries for specific race groupings in South Africa?

  • Yes

    Votes: 23 54.8%
  • No

    Votes: 17 40.5%
  • Unsure

    Votes: 2 4.8%

  • Total voters
    42

BBSA

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
30,227
Reaction score
28,804
Location
People's Republic of South Africa
http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/article685281.ece/Racist-fund-appeal-dismissed

Money from a multi-million rand education trust fund for white women only at the University of KwaZulu-Natal was available to all races after the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) dismissed an appeal.

The SCA dismissed an appeal against a judgment and order that set aside a racially restrictive clause limiting the beneficiaries of the Emma Smith Educational Fund to white women.

The fund was established by a bequest to the then Natal University College in the will of Sir Charles George Smith, a prominent industrialist and politician, who passed away in 1941.

The trust was go towards the higher education of "European girls born of British South African or Dutch South African parents", who have been resident in Durban for a period of at least three years immediately preceding the grant or payment.

The university applied successfully to the high court to have the racially restrictive clause removed and the residential qualification of "Durban" to the "Ethekwini Municipality" amended.

The curators ad litem for potential beneficiaries of the fund appealed to the SCA.

A panel of five judges unanimously held that there was a constitutional imperative to remove racially restrictive clauses, that conflict with public policy, from the conditions of an educational trust intended to benefit prospective students in need.
The SCA set aside the high court ruling in terms of "Durban" on the grounds that there was no evidence supporting the finding that a potential bursar who had to live in "Durban" would hamper the achievement of the fund's objectives.

The Emma Smith Education Fund was one of the largest administered by the University of KwaZulu-Natal currently.

When the matter went to court its assets had increased in value to about R27 million of which about R4 million was available for distribution to potential bursars.

So must ALL racially restrictive clauses in other funds also be removed and can we take it that laws with racially restrictive clauses must also be removed?
 
Sigh....

Its okay to have clauses restricting applicants to non white only, because of transformation. But its not okay to have clauses restricting applicants to white only because there must be no racially restrictive clauses? I'm confused. Surely its one or the other?

I still cant believe they would interfere with a man's will like that, however racist. Remind me to never any money to the state/education. No doubt the government will decide it needs it for luxury german vehicles.
 
I cannot believe it.

This was someone's private money and in the will it clearly stipulated what his wishes for the money were. We have no right to change that.

This is going to have serious implications for people deciding whether or not to leave their money to a university now. I wouldn't give my money to a university knowing it can change the conditions I wanted.
 
Of course, this is Africa after all.

Everyone chants "Equal rights" yet they only want whats best for themselves.

This is like everyday life, you can be called "whitey","boertjie", "snowflake" and a "colonialist pig" all day long with no repercussions, but dare you utter the "K" word or say "baboon" and the whole ****ing world is up in arms :mad:

Can anyone show me an instance where a white person won a court case for racial discrimination?

Why is it considered racist when this man wanted to provide higher education to his own people?
 
So can the laywers representing the trust fund then stop ALL payments going out? Do they not have a legal right to do so?
 
perhaps I can appeal to the same court for a job for me being a whino. (white old unemployed male with no disabilities)

No wait, my great great grand father must have been a slave trader??
 
I really think decisions like this should lay on the shoulders of the descendants of the trust initiater. I'm assuming there aren't any thus the reason why the university have taken it upon themselves to bring it up into the modern age?
 
So can the laywers representing the trust fund then stop ALL payments going out? Do they not have a legal right to do so?

By the looks of it the conditions of the trust have been changed. If they vote against funds being moved out they have to have a reason that is based on the perspective of the trust, not on their perspective. Remember they are administering the trust on behalf of the beneficiaries of the trust. If the trust now says "all race groups" the lawyers can't say "but she's not white!" because that is no longer the trust's position.

I am not a lawyer but in my brief experience with trusts that is how it was explained to me... so I could be wrong.
 
I really think decisions like this should lay on the shoulders of the descendants of the trust initiater. I'm assuming there aren't any thus the reason why the university have taken it upon themselves to bring it up into the modern age?

The university could have refused to take money from the funds, not?
 
Last edited:
I really think decisions like this should lay on the shoulders of the descendants of the trust initiater. I'm assuming there aren't any thus the reason why the university have taken it upon themselves to bring it up into the modern age?

Nonsense. The money doesn't belong to the descendants of the trust initiator.

They don't have power of attorney over the money they don't get a say. End of story. This is the basis of our entire bloody economy you're trying to undermine.
 
Did this case set a precedent where if you put money for your kids in a trust, the government could decide that the trust is discriminating against other kids? Or is it purely based on the wording (specifying race) in the trust?
 
Who does have power of attorney then?

The trust. A trust is a legal entity in and of itself.

People are then given the power to make decisions on behalf of the trust. However when they make decisions they have to make them within the confines of the rules put in place for the trust. What has happened here is the rules for the trust have been changed through the legal system. Which isn't supposed to happen :p
 
very scary .... basically stating that your last will and testament means squat .....
Surely it is the right of the person to determine exactly who/whom they want the money to go to ... even if it is a racist decision ... its is their money and their decision ... and no court should be allowed to change that!!!
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X