Van Niekerk en Genote Ingelyf v Administrateur van Transvaal (383/91) [1993] ZASCA 168; [1994] 2 All SA 26 (A) (12 November 1993)

Van Niekerk en Genote Ingelyf v Administrateur van Transvaal (383/91) [1993] ZASCA 168; [1994] 2 All SA 26 (A) (12 November 1993)

The court held that the Taxing Master was correct in allowing composite fees for the advocates, rather than separate fees for the preparation of heads of argument and preparation for appeal. The amounts allowed (R40,000 for the senior advocate and R26,667 for the junior advocate) were not manifestly unreasonable or...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1993] ZASCA 168
Parties
Applicant: J D Van Niekerk en Genote Ingelyf; Respondent: Die Administrateur van Transvaal
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 November 1993
Case Number
383/91
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Review of Taxing Master's Allocatur
Outcome
The application for review is dismissed with costs.
Judges
Corbett HR, Botha, Vivier, Nicholas, Harms
Legal Topics
Taxation of Costs, Advocates Fees, Review of Taxing Master, Costs on Appeal
Civil Procedure Taxation of Costs Advocates Fees Review of Taxing Master Costs on Appeal

Source-derived case record

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J D Van Niekerk en Genote Ingelyf

Applicant

Die Administrateur van Transvaal

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Review of Taxing Master's Allocatur

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Taxing Master erred in his taxation of advocates' fees in the appeal.
  2. 2 Whether separate fees for preparation of heads of argument and preparation for appeal are recoverable.
  3. 3 Whether the amounts allowed by the Taxing Master were unreasonably low.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Taxing Master was correct in allowing composite fees for the advocates, rather than separate fees for the preparation of heads of argument and preparation for appeal. The amounts allowed (R40,000 for the senior advocate and R26,667 for the junior advocate) were not manifestly unreasonable or so low as to constitute an error. The court found that the applicant's claimed hours and hourly rates were excessive and inappropriate for determining reasonable fees. The established practice is to allow a global fee for all work related to the appeal, and the Taxing Master's decision was consistent with comparable cases and professional norms. The objections to the taxation...

Court Disposition

The application for review is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for review of the Taxing Master's allocatur is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the application.