Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Van Rensburg v Freedom Property Fund Ltd (5421/2023) [2025] ZALMPPHC 133 (7 July 2025)
The High Court partly upheld a claim for unpaid contractual payments and attorney’s fees, but dismissed a director’s-fees claim under section 163.
Sports Tavern & Restaurant and Others v Executor Estate Late Santos (HCAA 01/2023) [2025] ZALMPPHC 17 (5 February 2025)
Appeal about taxation of costs for a High Court unopposed motion was upheld. The court reduced an attorney’s claimed R20,000 day fee to R3,500 as reasonable.
Claassen N.O. v Muller-Wolff and Another (1377/2021) [2022] ZAWCHC 158 (15 February 2022)
The court confirmed an anti-dissipation interdict over estate funds, finding the applicant had locus standi and that the first respondent’s transfers were unjustified.
Ismail v De Broglio Attorneys (5515/2018) [2019] ZAGPJHC 463 (8 October 2019)
The High Court dismissed an application to amend particulars of claim in a dispute over attorney fees from a Road Accident Fund matter.
Strydom Britz Mohulatsi Inc. v Mouton (64226/2011) [2016] ZAGPPHC 903 (11 October 2016)
The court found that the plaintiff did not breach the mandate to act professionally and diligently in prosecuting the RAF claim. The defendant failed to provide necessary documents despite repeated requests, which contributed to any delay in settlement. The defendant's counterclaim for damages in the form of mora interest was dismissed because there was no principal debt owing from the plaintiff to the defendant, and the law does not permit recovery of such damages in these circumstances. The plaintiff's claim for fees was supported by a taxed bill of costs, which was not disputed. Judgment w…
Source excerpt
Wimbush and Another v Erintrade (Pty) Ltd t/a RT Chemicals (548/13) [2013] ZAKZPHC 39 (11 June 2013)
The court found that the taxing master exercised discretion judicially in disallowing the costs of Cape Town attorneys as out-of-town instructing attorneys. The Respondent failed to demonstrate that the complexity of the matter or the location of directors and employees justified the employment of Cape Town attorneys on a party and party scale. The principal place of business and relevant events were within the jurisdiction of the Pietermaritzburg court, and instructions could have been obtained and affidavits prepared by local attorneys. The partial allowance of item 54 was reasonable, as th…
Source excerpt
van der Berg NO and Another v Dippenaar (596/06) [2012] ZAGPPHC 296 (19 November 2012)
High Court review of a taxation in a settled medical-negligence matter. The court upheld the taxing master’s rulings on tariff fees, preparation time, and bill-of-costs fees.
Dlamini v Maharaj (3260/10) [2010] ZAKZPHC 27 (8 June 2010)
The court held that the magistrate was correct in disallowing items in the first bill of costs that were covered by the instruction fee and drawing fee under the tariff for administration order applications. The tariff must be interpreted as including all attendances and correspondence necessary for taking instructions and drawing the application, and separate charges for such work are not permitted. Regarding the second to eighteenth bills, the court found that all work performed by Ms Maharaj during the administration was work required of her as administrator, and she was not entitled to re…
Source excerpt
Melamed & Hurwitz Incorporated v Goldberg (686/07) [2009] ZASCA 15 (19 March 2009)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that an attorney’s agreed R450,000 fee was extortionate and void because the client had been overreached.
Michael Brian Snoyman & Associates v Land Investments (Pty) Limited (A5005/2000, 99/4995) [2000] ZAGPHC 1 (13 June 2000)
The High Court upheld an appeal and remitted a fee dispute for oral evidence because material factual disputes could not be decided on affidavit.
Explore more
