Miti v Shoprite Checkers (Pty) Ltd (1999/17299) [2000] ZAGPHC 5 (12 October 2000)

Miti v Shoprite Checkers (Pty) Ltd (1999/17299) [2000] ZAGPHC 5 (12 October 2000)

The court found that none of the grounds for review of the Taxing Master's decision were present. The Taxing Master had not acted improperly, failed to apply her mind, or disregarded statutory provisions. The costs relating to attendances for the Magistrate's Court application were reasonably required, and the allowance for counsel's fees and multiple affidavits was proper given the respondent's vexatious conduct. The applicant's late request to restore sums taxed off was rejected due to its own failure to bring relevant agreements and orders to the Taxing Master's attention. The review application was dismissed, and the taxation as reflected in the allocatur was confirmed.

Citation
[2000] ZAGPHC 5
Parties
Respondent: Roy Genny Miti; Applicant: Shoprite Checkers (Pty) Ltd
Court
High Courts - Gauteng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 October 2000
Case Number
1999/17299
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Review of Taxation Under Rule 48 of the Uniform Rules of Court
Outcome
Respondent's application for review of taxation dismissed; taxation confirmed; respondent ordered to pay costs of review.
Judges
N.P. Willis
Legal Topics
Taxation of Costs, Review of Taxing Master, Magistrates Court Vs High Court Costs
Civil Procedure Taxation of Costs Review of Taxing Master Magistrates Court Vs High Court Costs

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

Parties

Roy Genny Miti

Respondent

Shoprite Checkers (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Review of Taxation Under Rule 48 of the Uniform Rules of Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Taxing Master erred in her taxation of costs relating to the eviction application.
  2. 2 Whether costs relating to attendances for the Magistrate's Court application were recoverable.
  3. 3 Whether counsel's fees and multiple affidavits were properly allowed in the bill of costs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that none of the grounds for review of the Taxing Master's decision were present. The Taxing Master had not acted improperly, failed to apply her mind, or disregarded statutory provisions. The costs relating to attendances for the Magistrate's Court application were reasonably required, and the allowance for counsel's fees and multiple affidavits was proper given the respondent's vexatious conduct. The applicant's late request to restore sums taxed off was rejected due to its own failure to bring relevant agreements and orders to the Taxing Master's attention. The review application was dismissed, and the taxation as reflected in the allocatur was confirmed.

Court Disposition

Respondent's application for review of taxation dismissed; taxation confirmed; respondent ordered to pay costs of review.

Orders

  • The taxation by the Taxing Master as reflected in her allocatur for the sum of R8,602.92 dated 28 July 2000 is confirmed.
  • The respondent is to pay the costs of this review application in the sum of R600.00.