Grancy Property Limited and Another v Law Society of the Cape of Good Hope and Others (3698/2014) [2014] ZAWCHC 164 (5 November 2014)

Grancy Property Limited and Another v Law Society of the Cape of Good Hope and Others (3698/2014) [2014] ZAWCHC 164 (5 November 2014)

The court found that the applicants were justified in launching the review application due to the respondents' failure to respond to requests for extension under PAJA and their belated opposition, which resulted in unnecessary costs. The respondents' conduct, including their late change of stance and eventual concession to the relief sought, constituted special circumstances warranting an adverse costs order. However, the court held that punitive costs were not justified, as there was no evidence of mala fides or egregious conduct, and that costs should be awarded on a party and party scale from the date of opposition, including the costs of two counsel for the main proceedings but only...

Citation
[2014] ZAWCHC 164
Parties
Applicant: Grancy Property Limited; Applicant: Montague Goldsmith AG in Liquidation; Respondent: Law Society of the Cape of Good Hope; Respondent: D P Smith N.O.; Respondent: N B Nyati N.O.; Respondent: C Loubser N.O.; Respondent: Dines Chandra Manilal Gihwala; Respondent: John Rogers N.O.; Respondent: Council of the Law Society of the Cape of Good Hope
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 November 2014
Case Number
3698/2014
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Costs Determination Following Settlement of Substantive Relief
Outcome
Costs order granted against the first respondent (Law Society of the Cape of Good Hope) from the date of opposition, on the party and party scale, including the costs of two counsel for the main proceedings and one counsel for the costs argument. Substantive relief granted by agreement.
Judges
J Cloete
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Disciplinary Proceedings, Costs Awards Against Statutory Bodies, Legal Representation in Inquiries, Video Link Testimony
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Disciplinary Proceedings Costs Awards Against Statutory Bodies Legal Representation in Inquiries Video Link Testimony

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 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Grancy Property Limited

Applicant

Montague Goldsmith AG in Liquidation

Applicant

Law Society of the Cape of Good Hope

Respondent

D P Smith N.O.

Respondent

N B Nyati N.O.

Respondent

C Loubser N.O.

Respondent

Dines Chandra Manilal Gihwala

Respondent

John Rogers N.O.

Respondent

Council of the Law Society of the Cape of Good Hope

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Costs Determination Following Settlement of Substantive Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to a costs order against the Law Society and its Council following settlement of the substantive review relief.
  2. 2 Whether special circumstances exist to justify an adverse costs order against a statutory body acting in the public interest.
  3. 3 Whether punitive costs or costs for two counsel are warranted in the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants were justified in launching the review application due to the respondents' failure to respond to requests for extension under PAJA and their belated opposition, which resulted in unnecessary costs. The respondents' conduct, including their late change of stance and eventual concession to the relief sought, constituted special circumstances warranting an adverse costs order. However, the court held that punitive costs were not justified, as there was no evidence of mala fides or egregious conduct, and that costs should be awarded on a party and party scale from the date of opposition, including the costs of two counsel for the main proceedings but only...

Court Disposition

Costs order granted against the first respondent (Law Society of the Cape of Good Hope) from the date of opposition, on the party and party scale, including the costs of two counsel for the main proceedings and one counsel for the costs argument. Substantive relief granted by agreement.

Orders

  • The applicants' legal representatives are entitled to attend and participate in the disciplinary enquiry to the extent necessary to protect their rights.
  • The applicants will be furnished with a copy of the transcript of proceedings of the enquiry on an ongoing basis as soon as available.