This is a very helpful clarification, and displays a robust civil South African requirement that not only the body of the will be initialled as read by the testator but also that the witness initial to attest that he has in effect done so.
This is very distinct from the old English principle that the witness only needs to see, or have the possibility of seeing the testator signing it. There was a recent dashing thread on whether witnesses view, or potential view of the testator signing it through a window through to a stationary parked carriage was sufficient.
Whilst it may be the longstanding practice of the Probate Court to insist upon the affidavit of a South African qualified attorney, which will apparently not be obtainable as to the points raised by Mahandree as it stands, may it not still be that s.3 WA 1963 might provide a way past it if a South African Attorney can assist in stating that the will appears, notwithstanding the formal deficiency under South African law , to meet the requirements as to the exception set out in s.3. WA 1963 in an case of extreme need, say where the testator has died in the meanwhile? I think that might be unlikely. However, as the movables are situated in the English or British jurisdiction, the Probate Court may have a technical jurisdiction to decide whether it meets s.3 WA 1963 notwithstanding. Counsel’s opinion as to the exact scope of the term “testators answering a particular description” might therefore be an appropriate option. It doesn’t however appear to be a hopeful one. I understand that there are dual qualified Counsel in Lincoln’s Inn.
Given Mahadree’s point, It would obviously be better if the Will could be redrafted and re-executed in proper South African form were the testator still alive. If not looks like a South African intestacy or s.3 as to the movables.