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
Symes and Another v De Vries Attorneys Incorporated and Another (2022-011114) [2024] ZAGPJHC 169 (22 February 2024)
The High Court granted leave to appeal only on the bail-money issue in a liquidation disposition dispute, leaving the punitive costs order untouched.
Van Wyk Van Heerden Attorneys v Gore N.O and Another (828/2021) [2022] ZASCA 128; [2022] 4 All SA 649 (SCA); 2023 (1) SA 80 (SCA) (30 September 2022)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that a deposit into an attorney’s trust account is only impeachable under s 26(1)(b) if the attorney benefited.
Gore N.O and Another v Van Wyk Van Heerden Attorneys Incorporated (17897/2019) [2021] ZAWCHC 95; [2022] 2 All SA 178 (WCC) (10 May 2021)
The application for leave to appeal was refused because the respondent failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success or any compelling reason for the appeal to be heard. The court found that the payments made by Brandstock Exchange (Pty) Ltd to the respondent's trust account were dispositions without value as contemplated by section 26(1) of the Insolvency Act and section 340 of the Companies Act. The respondent benefitted from the payments, as it had control and disposal over the funds, fulfilling the 'benefit' requirement. The court dismissed the respondent's arguments regarding the…
Source excerpt
Dreyer v Goss and Another (2013/12867) [2014] ZAGPJHC 364 (27 November 2014)
The court found that Goss, as attorney, had no legal basis to withhold payment of the trust monies from Dreyer, as the funds were received for Dreyer's benefit and no valid competing claim had been made by any third party for over three years. The attorney's duty is to comply with the client's instructions regarding trust monies unless a court orders otherwise. Any claims by third parties, such as Ganhao or the Company, would be against Dreyer and not Goss. The agreement reached between Dreyer and the Company that the funds should be paid to the Company in liquidation was deemed honourable an…
Source excerpt
Wycliffe Thipe Mothuloe t/a Mothuloe Attorneys v Kgafela II and Others (53972/2012) [2014] ZAGPPHC 928 (17 October 2014)
The High Court set aside the attachment and restraint of an attorney trust account and awarded attorney-and-client costs against the respondents.
Royal Bafokeng Nation and Others v Absa Bank Ltd and Others (38843/12) [2013] ZAGPJHC 82 (22 February 2013)
The application was dismissed because the applicants failed to establish a clear right, title and interest in the funds held under Sanlam Investment Company 5096410. The funds were not sufficiently earmarked as belonging to the applicants, and the cession by the attorneys to the first respondent was valid and effective against the world, including the first respondent. Even if the cession was invalid, the first respondent would have a common law right to retain the funds until any prejudice was cured. The first respondent acted bona fide and was not put on enquiry regarding the legitimacy of…
Source excerpt
Dangene Property Investment (Pty) Ltd and Another v S (A 42/2012) [2012] ZAWCHC 210 (14 June 2012)
The High Court upheld an appeal against a theft conviction, holding that the appellant dealt with his own funds in trust and committed breach of contract, not theft.
Wypkema v Lubbe (138/06) [2007] ZASCA 36; [2007] 4 All SA 1224 (SCA); 2007 (5) SA 138 (SCA) (28 March 2007)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that an attorney who draws a cheque on a trust account acts as principal, not as agent, and is personally liable on the cheque.
African Bank Ltd v Weiner and Others (051/2004) [2005] ZASCA 22; 2005 (4) SA 363 (SCA) (29 March 2005)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the 12.5% cap in section 74L applies only to necessary expenses and remuneration, not to costs incurred due to debtor default or disappearance. Costs arising from section 65 proceedings are recoverable separately, but only one collection commission may be claimed, and attorney-administrators cannot claim a section 65 collection fee in addition to the fee under section 74. Attorney-administrators act in a professional capacity throughout and must deposit all monies received into a trust account in terms of the Attorneys Act. Interest accrued on trust accou…
Source excerpt
Louw NO and Others v Coetzee and Others (342/02) [2002] ZASCA 156; [2003] 1 All SA 34 (SCA); 2003 (3) SA 329 (SCA) (29 November 2002)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that attorneys’ trust deposits at a bank did not become protected trust property under the 2001 Act.
Explore more
