South African Board of Sheriffs v Cibe (000219/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 583 (21 June 2024)

South African Board of Sheriffs v Cibe (000219/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 583 (21 June 2024)

The court found that while preparation fees for attorneys and counsel were reasonable and necessary, the reservation and collapse fees for days not actually spent on hearings were excessive and not justified as wasted costs on the party and party scale. There was no evidence that the legal representatives lost other work due to the postponements. Accordingly, the court upheld the review in part, set aside the allocatur, and ordered the Taxing Master to reduce the amounts allowed for reservation and collapse fees. The Board achieved substantial success in the review and was awarded costs on the appropriate scale.

Citation
[2024] ZAGPJHC 583
Parties
Applicant: South African Board of Sheriffs; Respondent: MN Cibe – The Sheriff, Soweto West
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 June 2024
Case Number
000219/2023
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Review of Taxing Master's Allocatur on Wasted Costs
Outcome
Review upheld in part; allocatur set aside and reduced; Board awarded costs of the review.
Judges
GC Wright
Legal Topics
Taxation of Costs, Wasted Costs, Review of Taxing Master, Party and Party Scale
Civil Procedure Taxation of Costs Wasted Costs Review of Taxing Master Party and Party Scale

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

Parties

South African Board of Sheriffs

Applicant

MN Cibe – The Sheriff, Soweto West

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Review of Taxing Master's Allocatur on Wasted Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Taxing Master erred in allowing certain items in the wasted costs bills for hearings postponed at the Board's request.
  2. 2 Whether reservation and collapse fees for attorneys and counsel were properly allowed as wasted costs.
  3. 3 What extent of reduction in the allocatur is justified based on the evidence before the court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that while preparation fees for attorneys and counsel were reasonable and necessary, the reservation and collapse fees for days not actually spent on hearings were excessive and not justified as wasted costs on the party and party scale. There was no evidence that the legal representatives lost other work due to the postponements. Accordingly, the court upheld the review in part, set aside the allocatur, and ordered the Taxing Master to reduce the amounts allowed for reservation and collapse fees. The Board achieved substantial success in the review and was awarded costs on the appropriate scale.

Court Disposition

Review upheld in part; allocatur set aside and reduced; Board awarded costs of the review.

Orders

  • The review is upheld in part.
  • The allocatur is set aside.