South Africa Case Law

South African Legal Practice Council v Selota (43012/2018)

South African Legal Practice Council v Selota (43012/2018) [2025] ZAGPPHC 475 (15 May 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

43012/2018

Judges

Davis, Khumalo

The court found that the respondent committed repeated and serious breaches of professional duties, including practicing without a Fidelity Fund certificate, maintaining trust account deficits, failing to keep proper accounting records, overreaching clients under contingency fee agreements, touting, and failing to account or pay clients timeously. The respondent's explanations were evasive, lacked credibility, and demonstrated a pattern of dishonesty and lack of insight. The cumulative effect of these transgressions rendered the respondent no longer fit and proper to practice law. The court h…

Source excerpt

• Legal Practitioner Misconduct
• Trust Account Deficits
• Contingency Fee Act Breaches
• Overreaching
• Failure To Account
• Striking Off Application

South African Legal Practice Council v Dube (23500/2020)

South African Legal Practice Council v Dube (23500/2020) [2025] ZAGPPHC 365 (15 April 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

23500/2020

Judges

N Davis, M Lenyai

The High Court struck an attorney from the roll for repeated misconduct, including failure to account, overreaching, client fund abuse, and practicing without a Fidelity Fund certificate.

• Legal Practitioner Misconduct
• Striking Off Application
• Failure To Account
• Overreaching
• Fidelity Fund Certificate
• Client Funds Misappropriation

Sports Tavern & Restaurant and Others v Executor Estate Late Santos (HCAA 01/2023)

Sports Tavern & Restaurant and Others v Executor Estate Late Santos (HCAA 01/2023) [2025] ZALMPPHC 17 (5 February 2025)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

HCAA 01/2023

Judges

G C Muller, J Ngobeni, M Z Makoti

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.

• Taxation Of Costs
• Attorney Fees
• High Court Appearance
• Wasted Costs
• Overreaching
• Role Of Taxing Master

Oosthuizen and Another v Rene Fouche Incorporated and Others (022383/2022)

Oosthuizen and Another v Rene Fouche Incorporated and Others (022383/2022) [2024] ZAGPJHC 683 (26 July 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

022383/2022

Judge

DA Turner

The court found that the contingency fee agreement concluded by the attorneys was invalid and unenforceable due to non-compliance with the Contingency Fees Act, both procedurally and substantively. The agreement was concluded too late, at a stage when litigation risk was minimal, and the attorneys failed to present the agreement and required affidavits to the court as mandated by section 4 of the Act. The attorneys overreached by applying a 100% success fee mark-up to fees incurred before the agreement and after the litigation risk had dissipated, including charging for work done by a differe…

Source excerpt

• Contingency Fee Agreements
• Fiduciary Duty
• Overreaching
• Locus Standi
• Waiver Of Child Rights
• Attorney And Own Client Costs

South African Legal Practice Council v Mangolela and Another (91612/2021)

South African Legal Practice Council v Mangolela and Another (91612/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 916 (23 November 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

91612/2021

Judges

K J Mogale, N Jansen van Niewenhuizen

Attorney struck from the roll after findings of trust-fund misappropriation, overreaching, poor accounting, and breach of a suspension order.

• Legal Practitioners Discipline
• Misappropriation Of Trust Funds
• Overreaching
• Breach Of Fiduciary Duty
• Curatorship
• Removal From Roll

Legal Practice Council v Rubushe (181/2020)

Legal Practice Council v Rubushe (181/2020) [2022] ZAECMKHC 37 (7 June 2022)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

181/2020

Judge

Jolwana

The court found that the attorney engaged in unethical overreaching in relation to contingency fee billing and non-compliance with statutory requirements.

• Contingency Fee Agreements
• Overreaching
• Legal Practitioner Ethics
• Costs Assessment
• Contingency-fee-agreements
• Legal-practitioner-ethics

R H Christie Incorporated v Taxing Master - Supreme Court of Appeal (1086/2018)

R H Christie Incorporated v Taxing Master - Supreme Court of Appeal (1086/2018) [2021] ZASCA 152 (27 October 2021)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1086/2018

Judge

NAVSA

The Supreme Court of Appeal partially upheld a review of taxation, allowing only certain disputed cost items and otherwise confirming the taxing master’s reductions.

• Review Of Taxation
• Attorney And Own Client Costs
• Overreaching
• Condonation Application
• Disbursements
• Fee Agreements

Law Society of the Northern Provinces v Biyana and Another (75342/17)

Law Society of the Northern Provinces v Biyana and Another (75342/17) [2019] ZAGPPHC 444 (23 August 2019)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

75342/17

Judges

N Kollapen, L Vorster

High Court struck two attorneys from the roll after finding misappropriation of trust monies, poor accounting, and overreaching in fees.

• Attorneys Act
• Professional Misconduct
• Removal From Roll
• Trust Account Misappropriation
• Overreaching
• Disciplinary Enquiry

Williams N.O v Taxing Mistress of the High Court,Port Elizabeth; In re: Williams N.O v Road Accident Fund and Others (942/2015)

Williams N.O v Taxing Mistress of the High Court,Port Elizabeth; In re: Williams N.O v Road Accident Fund and Others (942/2015) [2019] ZAECPEHC 34; [2019] 3 All SA 658 (ECP) (4 June 2019)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth

Case number

942/2015

Judges

G G Goosen, I T Stretch, T Malusi

The court held that the Taxing Mistress acted correctly in considering fees charged by counsel in other matters when determining the reasonableness of the fees claimed in the present matter. The practice in the Division allows counsel to hold trial briefs in consecutive matters on the running roll, but does not entitle counsel to charge a full day trial fee for each matter where attendances overlap. Charging more than one full day fee on the same day constitutes overreaching and renders the fees unreasonable. The Taxing Mistress properly exercised her discretion by allowing a composite fee ba…

Source excerpt

• Taxation Of Costs
• Counsel Fees
• Party And Party Costs
• Review Of Taxing Master
• Overreaching
• Running Roll Practice

Johannesburg Society of Advocates v Tiry (22915/2016)

Johannesburg Society of Advocates v Tiry (22915/2016) [2018] ZAGPJHC 512 (29 August 2018)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

22915/2016

Judges

C G Lamont, K Matojane

The court found that the respondent, over a period of several years, repeatedly accepted multiple trial briefs and charged multiple trial fees for matters set down on the same day, particularly in Road Accident Fund litigation. The evidence demonstrated that the respondent was actively preparing and consulting on several matters simultaneously, contradicting her claim that briefs were taken sequentially only after prior matters were finalised. The respondent's conduct constituted double briefing and overreaching, both of which are expressly prohibited by the Uniform Rules of Professional Cond…

Source excerpt

• Professional Conduct Of Advocates
• Double Briefing
• Overreaching
• Road Accident Fund Litigation
• Disciplinary Sanctions