Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
1 court collection
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Civil Procedure [2020] ZAECGHC 100

Johannes v Franz Maritz Attorneys (898/2020)

Johannes v Franz Maritz Attorneys (898/2020) [2020] ZAECGHC 100 (8 September 2020)

Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Case number
898/2020
Judge
NG Beshe

The court found that the first Contingency Fee Agreement entered into by the applicant's father was unenforceable as the applicant was already a major at the time. The respondent failed to produce the original agreement and could not substantiate its validity. The second Contingency Fee Agreement was concluded only a month before settlement and did not justify the respondent retaining 25% of the applicant's award. The court held that the respondent's conduct was unconscionable, excessive, and extortionate, and that the fee claimed was not proportionate to the work performed. The respondent's…

Source excerpt

  • Contingency Fee Agreements
  • Attorney Client Fees
  • Road Accident Fund Claims
  • Judicial Oversight Of Fee Agreements
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2020] ZAECGHC 73

Mkuyana v Road Accident Fund (4000/2017)

Mkuyana v Road Accident Fund (4000/2017) [2020] ZAECGHC 73; [2020] 3 All SA 834 (ECG); 2020 (6) SA 405 (ECG) (2 July 2020)

Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Case number
4000/2017
Judges
D Van Zyl, G H Bloem, A Rawjee

The court held that the contingency fee agreement between the plaintiff and her attorney was invalid and unenforceable due to non-compliance with the Contingency Fees Act. The attorney's disclosed 'normal fee' was found to be unreasonable, being significantly higher than both the existing and proposed court tariffs, and not justified by the evidence. The agreement was concluded after litigation had commenced, which undermined statutory requirements such as the client's cooling-off period and proper assessment of the claim's prospects. The court emphasized that strict compliance with the Act i…

Source excerpt

  • Contingency Fee Agreements
  • Attorney And Own Client Costs
  • Reasonableness Of Fees
  • Judicial Oversight Of Fee Agreements
  • Access To Justice
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.