Roome v Roome (18741/2007) [2008] ZAWCHC 312 (10 December 2008)

Roome v Roome (18741/2007) [2008] ZAWCHC 312 (10 December 2008)

The court found that the respondent made unwarranted and scandalous allegations against the applicant's legal representatives, which constituted an attack on their integrity and the dignity of the legal profession. The explanation offered by the respondent for these allegations was found to be disingenuous and unconvincing. While the court acknowledged the delay in bringing the costs application and the absence of a direct apology, it held that such conduct cannot be tolerated in matrimonial litigation or any proceedings. However, the court did not find the conduct of the respondent's legal representatives to be so egregious as to justify an award of costs de bonis propriis. Instead,...

Citation
[2008] ZAWCHC 312
Parties
Applicant: Michael Cecil Roome; Respondent: Jurinda Roome
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 December 2008
Case Number
18741/2007
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Post Judgment
Outcome
Costs of 21 December 2007 are awarded in favour of the applicant on an attorney and client scale; costs of the present hearing are awarded on the ordinary scale.
Judges
Davis
Legal Topics
Punitive Costs, Attorney and Client Costs, Officers of the Court, Scandalous Allegations
Civil Procedure Family and Children Punitive Costs Attorney and Client Costs Officers of the Court Scandalous Allegations

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Cecil Roome

Applicant

Jurinda Roome

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Costs Application / Post Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a punitive costs order should be granted against the respondent for making scandalous allegations against the applicant's legal representatives.
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of the respondent's legal representatives justified an award of costs de bonis propriis.
  3. 3 Whether the delay in bringing the costs application affects the appropriateness of a punitive costs order.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent made unwarranted and scandalous allegations against the applicant's legal representatives, which constituted an attack on their integrity and the dignity of the legal profession. The explanation offered by the respondent for these allegations was found to be disingenuous and unconvincing. While the court acknowledged the delay in bringing the costs application and the absence of a direct apology, it held that such conduct cannot be tolerated in matrimonial litigation or any proceedings. However, the court did not find the conduct of the respondent's legal representatives to be so egregious as to justify an award of costs de bonis propriis. Instead,...

Court Disposition

Costs of 21 December 2007 are awarded in favour of the applicant on an attorney and client scale; costs of the present hearing are awarded on the ordinary scale.

Orders

  • Costs of 21 December 2007 are awarded in favour of the applicant on an attorney and client scale.
  • Costs of the hearing on 10 December 2008 are awarded in favour of the applicant on the ordinary scale.