Molefe v Taxing Master and Another (81552/2015) [2021] ZAGPPHC 18 (25 January 2021)

Molefe v Taxing Master and Another (81552/2015) [2021] ZAGPPHC 18 (25 January 2021)

The court found that the Taxing Master exercised her discretion correctly and judicially in taxing the Bill of Costs for the entire application to compel, as the application was finalised when Mr Molefe complied with the notice in terms of uniform rule 35(3). The cost order granted on 15 May 2018 was valid and immediately payable, as there is no provision in the Uniform Rules of Court requiring costs to await finalisation of the main action. The applicant's objections to individual items were not specifically raised during taxation and thus did not form part of the review. The proper procedure for challenging an allegedly erroneous order is to seek rescission, not to challenge the Taxing...

Citation
[2021] ZAGPPHC 18
Parties
Applicant: V. Molefe; Respondent: The Taxing Master; Respondent: M.M. Molefe
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 January 2021
Case Number
81552/2015
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Review of Taxing Master's Decision on Bill of Costs After Interlocutory Application to Compel
Outcome
Review application dismissed with costs.
Judges
E.M Kubushi
Legal Topics
Taxation of Costs, Review of Taxing Master, Interlocutory Application, Uniform Rules of Court, Costs Orders
Civil Procedure Taxation of Costs Review of Taxing Master Interlocutory Application Uniform Rules of Court Costs Orders

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

V. Molefe

Applicant

The Taxing Master

Respondent

M.M. Molefe

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Review of Taxing Master's Decision on Bill of Costs After Interlocutory Application to Compel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Taxing Master exercised her discretion unreasonably, incorrectly, or contrary to the Court Order when taxing the Bill of Costs.
  2. 2 Whether costs awarded in an interlocutory application are immediately payable without an explicit order for immediate payment.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's objections to individual items in the Bill of Costs were properly raised and considered.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Taxing Master exercised her discretion correctly and judicially in taxing the Bill of Costs for the entire application to compel, as the application was finalised when Mr Molefe complied with the notice in terms of uniform rule 35(3). The cost order granted on 15 May 2018 was valid and immediately payable, as there is no provision in the Uniform Rules of Court requiring costs to await finalisation of the main action. The applicant's objections to individual items were not specifically raised during taxation and thus did not form part of the review. The proper procedure for challenging an allegedly erroneous order is to seek rescission, not to challenge the Taxing...

Court Disposition

Review application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The review application is dismissed with costs.