Story audio is generated using AI
Former public protector Thuli Madonsela’s legal battle over the estate of her late fiancé, businessman Dick Foxton, has become more acrimonious. The Foxton family and the executors of his estate are demanding to see the diary entries, e-mails and other documents underpinning her challenge to his final will.
They also want a detailed apology for her “defamatory” comments about the executors and are demanding rental and other costs relating to Madonsela’s continued occupation of a property outside Stellenbosch.
Madonsela is seeking to have what she describes as Foxton’s “purported” 2025 will declared invalid and the executors removed. The respondents want the court to declare the February 3 2025 document Foxton’s last valid will or, alternatively, refer the dispute to trial if it cannot be determined on affidavit.
At the heart of the dispute is Madonsela’s assertion that she was far more than Foxton’s girlfriend. In her founding affidavit, she tells the Johannesburg high court that their relationship was a permanent life partnership that carried all the hallmarks of a marriage, creating reciprocal duties of support and an expectation that she would share in his estate.
“I had a permanent, stable, intimate relationship with Mr Foxton that had virtually all the characteristics of a marriage … as permanent life partners with a commitment to each other that was analogous to marriage.”
He often told me and others that I would be looked after well after his death
Foxton, a veteran public relations executive, died in his sleep in June last year, aged 82.
“I contend that the requisite statutory formalities for the 2025 will were not complied with and undue influence may have been exerted on Mr Foxton when that will was purportedly executed,” Madonsela claims.
She says she and Foxton met in August 2016, became engaged in December 2017 and consciously built a shared life together.
“Mr Foxton and I were in a long-term, serious, romantic relationship for many years and consciously converted it into a lifelong intimate partnership.”
She adds that they lived “as spouses analogous to husband and wife”, supported one another emotionally, socially and financially, and planned to spend the rest of their lives together.
According to Madonsela, Foxton repeatedly assured her that she would be financially secure after his death.
“Though Mr Foxton never showed me any of his wills, he regularly spoke openly about his estate planning and often told me and others that I would be looked after well after his death.”
She says those assurances were reflected in a succession of earlier wills.
According to the founding affidavit, wills executed between 2019 and 2020 progressively increased the amount earmarked for her from R6m to R8m before ultimately providing R10m to enable her to purchase a home in Stellenbosch.
Madonsela argues that the progression demonstrates Foxton’s longstanding intention to provide for her as his life partner.
Another key pillar of her case is a diary entry dated February 3 2025, which she says undermines the circumstances surrounding the execution of the disputed will.
“A contemporaneous diary entry for 3 February 2025 records no meeting with either executor nor any meeting with either attesting witness for that day.”
The respondents are now demanding that Madonsela produce the documents on which she relies.
The Foxton family and the executors have signalled that they intend mounting a comprehensive legal counteroffensive.
In papers accompanying Beder’s answering affidavit and counter-application, the respondents ask the court to declare the document dated February 3 2025 to be Richard Foxton’s last valid will.
Should the court find that the dispute cannot properly be decided on affidavit because of material factual disputes, they seek an order referring the matter to trial for oral evidence.
The respondents also accuse Madonsela of making a series of defamatory allegations against Beder in relation to the administration of Foxton’s estate.
They seek an order restraining her from repeating claims that Beder pursued a “divide and rule strategy”, orchestrated a “wicked scheme”, was an “evil man”, or that he and Taylor engaged in fraud, corruption or maladministration while administering the estate.
The respondents further seek an order compelling Madonsela to remove any social media posts or other publications containing those allegations, publish a written retraction and apology, and communicate that apology to the respondents, the master of the high court and the minister of justice & constitutional development should the court grant the relief sought.
The counter-application also includes financial relief relating to Madonsela’s continued occupation of the De Zalze estate property outside Stellenbosch, with the respondents seeking occupational compensation calculated at R35,000 a month, together with payment of rates, levies, utility charges and other associated costs they allege are due.
The Foxton family’s attorney, Tracy Sischy, declined to comment on the merits of the dispute, saying the matter was sub judice and should be determined by the court on the evidence before it rather than through public debate.
“Mr Foxton was, throughout his life, fiercely protective of his privacy and that of his family. Our clients are committed to respecting that legacy,” she said.
Madonsela said: “Out of ethical considerations, I choose not to delve into the specific details of my late life partner’s deceased estate, which is a sub judice matter.”
She nevertheless maintained that the administration of the estate had been tainted by unlawful conduct and accused the executors of attempting to use media coverage to pressure her into abandoning her legal challenge.
“I have previously indicated that I have no intention to litigate this matter through the media. In fact, public mobilisation and attempts to bully me or scandalise me will not take away the illegality, unethical conduct and suspected fraud that has characterised the reporting of my late life partner’s deceased estate.”
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.