Joubert v Meyer (51155/2014) [2017] ZAGPPHC 586 (13 September 2017)

Joubert v Meyer (51155/2014) [2017] ZAGPPHC 586 (13 September 2017)

The court found that the damages award should be corrected to R390,588.88 to reflect the agreed apportionment. The defendant's rule 34 offer exceeded the corrected award, and the court exercised its discretion to reconsider the costs order. The plaintiff was entitled to costs up to the date of the offer, including senior counsel's fees, as the employment of senior counsel was justified. Thereafter, the defendant was entitled to costs from the date after the offer to the conclusion of the trial. The court declined to make a special order regarding senior counsel's fees, leaving it to the taxing master to determine reasonableness. The application for correction and reconsideration of costs...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 586
Parties
Plaintiff: Juliana Joubert; Defendant: Dr Andre Meyer
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 September 2017
Case Number
51155/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Post Trial Application for Costs and Correction of Damages Award
Outcome
Application granted. Damages award corrected and costs order reconsidered.
Judges
G T Avvakoumides
Legal Topics
Rule 34 Offers, Medical Negligence, Quantum of Damages, Costs Awards, Mora Interest
Civil Procedure Delict Rule 34 Offers Medical Negligence Quantum of Damages Costs Awards Mora Interest

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Juliana Joubert

Plaintiff

Dr Andre Meyer

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Post Trial Application for Costs and Correction of Damages Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the damages award should be corrected to reflect the proper apportionment agreed upon by the parties.
  2. 2 Whether the costs order should be reconsidered in light of the defendant's rule 34 offer exceeding the final award.
  3. 3 Whether the employment of senior counsel by the plaintiff was justified and should be reflected in the costs order.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the damages award should be corrected to R390,588.88 to reflect the agreed apportionment. The defendant's rule 34 offer exceeded the corrected award, and the court exercised its discretion to reconsider the costs order. The plaintiff was entitled to costs up to the date of the offer, including senior counsel's fees, as the employment of senior counsel was justified. Thereafter, the defendant was entitled to costs from the date after the offer to the conclusion of the trial. The court declined to make a special order regarding senior counsel's fees, leaving it to the taxing master to determine reasonableness. The application for correction and reconsideration of costs...

Court Disposition

Application granted. Damages award corrected and costs order reconsidered.

Orders

  • The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the sum of R390,588.88, due and payable from 6 February 2017, with mora interest at the applicable rate until payment.
  • The defendant is ordered to pay the plaintiff's taxed or agreed costs up to 30 March 2016, including counsel's fees, reservation, preparation and qualifying fees of quantum experts, and reasonable costs of obtaining expert reports.