Bouwer v Bouwer and Another (361/04) [2008] ZAECHC 28 (17 April 2008)

Bouwer v Bouwer and Another (361/04) [2008] ZAECHC 28 (17 April 2008)

The court found that the employment of two counsel by the plaintiff in relation to the special plea was justified, considering the complexity and importance of the main matter, the substantial value of the claim, and the fact that both parties had briefed two counsel from the outset. The special plea, although narrow, was not rendered simple or unimportant, and could have been decisive for the plaintiff's claim. The court held that the relevant factors warranted the costs of two counsel, including costs for argument on costs, and ordered the first defendant to pay such costs.

Citation
[2008] ZAECHC 28
Parties
Plaintiff: Jan Walters Bouwer; Defendant: Petrus Frederick Bouwer; Defendant: Master of the High Court
Court
High Courts - Eastern Cape
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 April 2008
Case Number
361/04
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure / Costs Determination Following Withdrawal of Special Plea
Outcome
Costs awarded in favour of the plaintiff, including costs of two counsel for the special plea.
Judges
N Dambuza
Legal Topics
Costs Award, Special Plea, Employment of Multiple Counsel
Civil Procedure Costs Award Special Plea Employment of Multiple Counsel

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jan Walters Bouwer

Plaintiff

Petrus Frederick Bouwer

Defendant

Master of the High Court

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Procedure / Costs Determination Following Withdrawal of Special Plea

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to costs for two counsel following the withdrawal of the special plea by the first defendant.
  2. 2 Whether the employment of two counsel was reasonable and justified in the circumstances of the special plea.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the employment of two counsel by the plaintiff in relation to the special plea was justified, considering the complexity and importance of the main matter, the substantial value of the claim, and the fact that both parties had briefed two counsel from the outset. The special plea, although narrow, was not rendered simple or unimportant, and could have been decisive for the plaintiff's claim. The court held that the relevant factors warranted the costs of two counsel, including costs for argument on costs, and ordered the first defendant to pay such costs.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded in favour of the plaintiff, including costs of two counsel for the special plea.

Orders

  • The first defendant is ordered to pay the costs incurred by the plaintiff in relation to the special plea, including the costs of two counsel.