Bekker v De Agrela and Others (A5096/2019; 42125/2018)
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
- Contingency Fees Act
- Legal Practice Act
- Costs Taxation
- Indemnification Principle
- Bar Rules
- Fee Agreements