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
TBP Building and Civils (Pty) Ltd (In Liquidation) v Shamla Chetty t/a Nationwide Electrical and Others (D4774/2019) [2025] ZAKZDHC 46 (17 July 2025)
The High Court upheld a bank-account attachment for costs, but modified it to reflect set-off between the parties’ taxed bills.
South Mead (Pty) (Ltd) t/a Meister Cold Store v Acrow Limited (A357/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1121 (12 November 2024)
The appeal was dismissed on the basis that the decision of the court a quo to set aside the taxation of the bill of costs was not appealable. The decision lacked finality, was not definitive of the rights of the parties, and did not dispose of any portion of the relief claimed in the main proceedings. The appellant retains the right to set the bill of costs down for taxation afresh, and the Taxing Master will reconsider the bill after proper notice. The principles established in Zweni v Minister of Law and Order remain applicable, and the court found no reason to depart from them. Accordingly…
Source excerpt
Masweneng Attorneys and Another v Makwela M.P.Attorneys and Others (1326/2014) [2024] ZALMPPHC 120 (30 September 2024)
The court found that the applicants failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay in challenging the taxed bill of costs. Documentary evidence indicated that notice of taxation was delivered, and the applicants were aware of the taxed bill as of 26 October 2016. The delay of almost one year was not justified, and the explanation that the applicants were waiting for proof of service was not credible, as such information could have been obtained from the court file. The court held that there were no prospects of success in the application for condonation and that the interests of j…
Source excerpt
Engaged Business Turnaround (Pty) Ltd and Another v CP Crane Hire (Pty) Ltd and Others (046219/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 817 (22 August 2024)
The court held that Rule 35(12) entitles a party to production of documents referenced in pleadings or affidavits, regardless of whether pleadings are closed or an answering affidavit has been filed. The applicants' objections regarding lateness, specificity, and relevance are unfounded, as Rule 35(12) does not require detailed reference or relevance as a limitation. The respondents raised a bona fide dispute regarding the reasonableness of the legal fees, and the documents sought are relevant to resolving this dispute. The remuneration agreement does not override the respondents' right to di…
Source excerpt
Mokwana v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Others (1825/2024) [2024] ZAECMKHC 100 (20 August 2024)
The court found that there was no evidence before it that the applicant could not have found a competent local attorney in Mthatha or Makhanda willing to act on a contingency basis. The instruction of a Pretoria-based attorney was therefore not necessary. The Taxing Mistress exercised her discretion correctly in refusing to allow two bills of costs and requiring a composite bill. The court granted condonation for the late filing of the review application in the interests of the minor child but dismissed the review application on the merits, upholding the Taxing Mistress's decision. The applic…
Source excerpt
SecureBT (Pty) Ltd v Norris and Another (21699/2021) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1037 (15 September 2023)
The High Court varied a costs order to include reserved Part A costs against the first respondent, but refused to add the second respondent to that liability.
Carelse v Stuurman N.O. and Another (17199/2022) [2023] ZAWCHC 193 (13 June 2023)
The court partly upheld objections to a deceased estate L&D account, postponing legal costs for taxation, but disallowing estate-agent commission issues only in part.
Letsoale v Road Accident Fund [2023] ZAGPPHC 456; 2023 (6) SA 533 (GP) (12 June 2023)
The court held that contingency fee agreements are only valid where a genuine risk or contingency exists and the practitioner has properly assessed the prospects of success. In three of the four matters, the agreements were entered into when success was virtually guaranteed or no proper assessment of risk was undertaken, rendering those agreements invalid under the Contingency Fees Act. Only in the Letsoale matter was there sufficient contingency to justify the agreement. The court further found that attempts by practitioners to include specific items in costs orders to fetter the Taxing Mast…
Source excerpt
Bekker v De Agrela and Others (A5096/2019; 42125/2018) [2022] ZAGPJHC 939 (25 November 2022)
The court found that the arrangement between counsel and the respondents was not a contingency fee agreement as contemplated by the Contingency Fees Act, but rather an arrangement falling under section 92 of the Legal Practice Act. Under section 92, counsel's entitlement to fees is triggered only if costs are recovered from the opposing party, and the client is never liable for counsel's fees. The arrangement did not require compliance with the statutory formalities of the Contingency Fees Act. The applicant, as a third party, lacked standing to challenge the validity of the fee arrangement,…
Source excerpt
R.S v Member of the Executive Council for Health of the Gauteng Provincial Government (65454/2018) [2022] ZAGPPHC 356 (17 May 2022)
Settlement in a medical-negligence claim was made an order of court, with directions on taxation of attorney-client costs, trust creation, and trustee composition.
Explore more
