Delport v Maroela Properties CC t/a Maroela Holiday Flats (12655/2011) [2018] ZAKZDHC 40 (10 September 2018)

Delport v Maroela Properties CC t/a Maroela Holiday Flats (12655/2011) [2018] ZAKZDHC 40 (10 September 2018)

The court found that the Taxing Master exercised his discretion properly in taxing off costs that were not reasonably incurred, including those arising from the appointment of Gauteng-based legal representatives and unspecified items. The defendant's choice to appoint attorneys outside the jurisdiction was for the convenience of its insurer and not justified by the facts of the case, as the cause of action and witnesses were located in KwaZulu-Natal. The Master correctly disallowed attorney and client costs and items lacking sufficient particularity. The court held that the successful litigant is entitled only to costs reasonably incurred, and the Master provided adequate reasons for each...

Citation
[2018] ZAKZDHC 40
Parties
Plaintiff: Francois Stephanus Delport; Defendant: Maroela Properties CC t/a Maroela Holiday Flats
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 September 2018
Case Number
12655/2011
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Review of Taxation Under Rule 48
Outcome
The application for review of taxation is dismissed.
Judges
Mbatha
Legal Topics
Taxation of Costs, Party and Party Costs, Attorney and Client Costs, Discretion of Taxing Master, Choice of Legal Representative
Civil Procedure Taxation of Costs Party and Party Costs Attorney and Client Costs Discretion of Taxing Master Choice of Legal Representative

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Francois Stephanus Delport

Plaintiff

Maroela Properties CC t/a Maroela Holiday Flats

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Review of Taxation Under Rule 48

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Taxing Master exercised his discretion properly in taxing off certain costs from the defendant's bill of costs.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant was entitled to recover costs incurred by appointing legal representatives based in Gauteng for litigation in KwaZulu-Natal.
  3. 3 Whether the Master correctly identified and taxed off attorney and client costs and other unspecified items.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Taxing Master exercised his discretion properly in taxing off costs that were not reasonably incurred, including those arising from the appointment of Gauteng-based legal representatives and unspecified items. The defendant's choice to appoint attorneys outside the jurisdiction was for the convenience of its insurer and not justified by the facts of the case, as the cause of action and witnesses were located in KwaZulu-Natal. The Master correctly disallowed attorney and client costs and items lacking sufficient particularity. The court held that the successful litigant is entitled only to costs reasonably incurred, and the Master provided adequate reasons for each...

Court Disposition

The application for review of taxation is dismissed.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • Each party to pay its own costs.