This blog is co-authored by Kamogelo Madiba, a candidate attorney.

A May 2025 judgment dealt with life insurance claims where beneficiaries are suspected of involvement in the insured’s demise. The court made no finding but gave some useful reminders of the rights of the insured and the insurer.

During July 2021, the insured was murdered at the home of her husband who was the sole beneficiary under her life insurance policy. The crime prompted a criminal investigation by the South African Police Service. The insurer received an anonymous tip-off from a person claiming to be a family member of the insured, implicating the husband. Subsequently, the investigating officer identified the husband as a suspect in the ongoing investigation.

The insurer declined to pay the policy proceeds to the husband, because it was waiting for either a post-mortem report confirming the cause of death or written confirmation from SAPS that the husband was to be tried or was no longer a suspect. Its approach was based on prior case law and public policy considerations which prohibit someone from profiting from their own crime.

The husband sought an order compelling the insurer to pay the policy proceeds, notwithstanding that he remained a suspect.

The court did not make a final decision. Instead, it postponed the matter, requiring further affidavits, including on the status of the investigation.

The judgment emphasizes two obligations of life insurers that can pull in opposite directions. On the one hand, insurers must honour legitimate claims within a reasonable time to avoid financial hardship to grieving families. On the other hand, insurers should not allow criminals to benefit from their crimes.

Unfortunately, as borne out in this case, implicated beneficiaries and insurers should be prepared for prolonged delays in criminal investigations, especially considering the detective crisis involving almost two million unresolved dockets which recently made front-page news.

If policy proceeds are paid to a beneficiary who it subsequently transpires caused the insured’s death, then the insurer is entitled to recover the amount paid but that may be of little help.

Mashaba v Master of the High Court and Others

For more on payment deferral of life insurance policy proceeds, see our previous blog here.