Conrad Kruger Inc and Another v Taxing Master and Another (2018/45232) [2020] ZAGPPHC 212 (23 March 2020)

Conrad Kruger Inc and Another v Taxing Master and Another (2018/45232) [2020] ZAGPPHC 212 (23 March 2020)

The court found that the Taxing Master correctly proceeded with taxation in the absence of proof that legal services were provided free of charge to the second respondent. The Taxing Master was bound to apply the cost order as granted by the court, which specified attorney and own client costs, including the costs of two counsel. The applicants' arguments regarding the limitation of counsel's fees to the Magistrates' Court scale under Rule 69(3) were rejected, as this rule applies only to party and party costs. The Taxing Master acted reasonably in allowing certain items and reducing others where appropriate, and there was no basis to interfere with the Taxing Master's rulings.

Citation
[2020] ZAGPPHC 212
Parties
Applicant: Conrad Kruger Inc; Applicant: Conrad Hendrik Kruger; Respondent: The Taxing Master; Respondent: Karl Weiner Luderitz
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 March 2020
Case Number
2018/45232
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Review of Taxing Master's Rulings Under Rule 48
Outcome
Application for review dismissed; no order as to costs.
Judges
Mokose
Legal Topics
Taxation of Costs, Attorney and Own Client Costs, Rule 48 Review, Rule 69 Application, Costs Order Enforcement
Civil Procedure Taxation of Costs Attorney and Own Client Costs Rule 48 Review Rule 69 Application Costs Order Enforcement

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Conrad Kruger Inc

Applicant

Conrad Hendrik Kruger

Applicant

The Taxing Master

Respondent

Karl Weiner Luderitz

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Review of Taxing Master's Rulings Under Rule 48

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Taxing Master erred in allowing taxation to proceed despite allegations of a personal relationship between the second respondent and his legal representatives.
  2. 2 Whether costs should be taxed on an attorney and own client basis or party and party basis.
  3. 3 Whether the Taxing Master had discretion to deviate from the court's cost order.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Taxing Master correctly proceeded with taxation in the absence of proof that legal services were provided free of charge to the second respondent. The Taxing Master was bound to apply the cost order as granted by the court, which specified attorney and own client costs, including the costs of two counsel. The applicants' arguments regarding the limitation of counsel's fees to the Magistrates' Court scale under Rule 69(3) were rejected, as this rule applies only to party and party costs. The Taxing Master acted reasonably in allowing certain items and reducing others where appropriate, and there was no basis to interfere with the Taxing Master's rulings.

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The application for review is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.