Vallaro v Road Accident Fund (21562/18) [2020] ZAGPJHC 140; 2021 (4) SA 302 (GJ) (17 June 2020)

Vallaro v Road Accident Fund (21562/18) [2020] ZAGPJHC 140; 2021 (4) SA 302 (GJ) (17 June 2020)

The court held that the contingency fee agreement signed by the severely mentally disabled claimant was void ab initio due to his lack of contractual capacity. The curatrix ad litem, appointed after the agreement was signed, could not ratify the agreement because a void contract cannot be revived or validated by subsequent ratification. The legal foundation for contracts requires both parties to have capacity to contract, and where this is absent, no valid agreement comes into existence. The practice of curators ratifying such agreements is based on a misunderstanding of the law, which only allows ratification of acts done by a falsus procurator, not by the mentally disabled person...

Citation
[2020] ZAGPJHC 140
Parties
Plaintiff: Adv C Vallaro; Defendant: Road Accident Fund
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 June 2020
Case Number
21562/18
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Judgment
Outcome
The contingency fee agreement entered into by the claimant was declared invalid.
Judges
C E Thompson
Legal Topics
Contractual Capacity, Void Contract, Contingency Fee Agreement
Civil Procedure Contractual Capacity Void Contract Contingency Fee Agreement

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 5 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Adv C Vallaro

Plaintiff

Road Accident Fund

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a contingency fee agreement entered into by a severely mentally disabled person is valid.
  2. 2 Whether a curator ad litem can ratify an agreement that is void ab initio due to lack of contractual capacity.
  3. 3 Whether the practice of curators ratifying such agreements is legally sound.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the contingency fee agreement signed by the severely mentally disabled claimant was void ab initio due to his lack of contractual capacity. The curatrix ad litem, appointed after the agreement was signed, could not ratify the agreement because a void contract cannot be revived or validated by subsequent ratification. The legal foundation for contracts requires both parties to have capacity to contract, and where this is absent, no valid agreement comes into existence. The practice of curators ratifying such agreements is based on a misunderstanding of the law, which only allows ratification of acts done by a falsus procurator, not by the mentally disabled person...

Court Disposition

The contingency fee agreement entered into by the claimant was declared invalid.

Orders

  • The contingency fee agreement signed by the claimant is declared void ab initio and invalid.
  • No costs order is made against any party.