The conclusion:
The burial order issued to the 1n respondent on 18 November 2020 was correctly issued with the knowledge of the applicant. She conceded in evidence that there was nothing wrong with the manner of its issuance. It remains valid. There is no reason to replace a valid burial order with another. The application for an interdict cannot succeed. There is no evidence that the 1n respondent will exclude the applicant the deceased’s funeral. The assignment of roles at a funeral as stated in this case, does not amount to a restriction on the applicant’s rights to be participate in activities at her daughter’s funeral which warrants the intervention of the court. The applicant has not established the legal basis for the reliefs sought. Costs must follow the result.