South Africa Case Law

Mucavele v Health MEC Mpumalanga (3352/2016)

Mucavele v Health MEC Mpumalanga (3352/2016) [2022] ZAMPMBHC 32; 2023 (3) SA 173 (MM) (17 March 2022)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

3352/2016

Judge

Legodi JP

The court found that the fee agreement between the plaintiff and her attorneys, whereby fees and disbursements were to be paid only upon successful conclusion of the litigation and from the capital amount recovered, constitutes a contingency fee agreement under the Contingency Fees Act. The agreement was illegal for non-compliance with the Act, as no proper contingency fee agreement was concluded and no written cost estimate was provided as required by the Legal Practice Act. The court declined to make the draft order an order of court due to the illegality of the fee agreement and the premat…

Source excerpt

• Contingency Fee Agreements
• Legal Practitioners Conduct
• Medical Negligence
• Settlement Agreements
• Costs Taxation
• Trusts For Minors

Van Rooyen obo M.G.N v Road Accident Fund (77303/2018)

Van Rooyen obo M.G.N v Road Accident Fund (77303/2018) [2021] ZAGPPHC 334 (17 May 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

77303/2018

Judge

K Strydom

The High Court held that a minor’s RAF award could be protected in trust during minority, but not bound into majority without consent or a finding of incapacity.

• Curatorship
• Trusts For Minors
• Road Accident Fund
• Mental Capacity
• Best Interests Of Child
• Damages Award Protection

Selota Attorneys and Another v ONR and Others (2018/11026)

Selota Attorneys and Another v ONR and Others (2018/11026) [2020] ZAGPJHC 232; [2020] 4 All SA 569 (GJ) (21 August 2020)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2018/11026

Judge

Gilbert

The court found that the applicants failed to establish any procedural error justifying rescission under Rule 42(1)(a). The applicants did not demonstrate that the court was unaware of any fact which, if known, would have precluded the granting of the order. The relief granted, except for paragraph 1, was reasonably anticipated in light of the nature of the proceedings and the interests of the minor. The applicants' defence lacked merit, as they had no mandate to deal with the funds after termination and failed to pay the funds to the respondent's attorneys. The court held that even if a proc…

Source excerpt

• Rescission Of Judgment
• Default Judgment
• Trusts For Minors
• Attorney Misconduct
• Mandate Termination

Mphurwana v Padongelukkefonds (7548/2008)

Mphurwana v Padongelukkefonds (7548/2008) [2011] ZAFSHC 177 (17 November 2011)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

7548/2008

Judge

Kruger, R

High Court quantum ruling on a minor’s future earnings, trust administration, and contingency deductions after a Road Accident Fund settlement.

• Road Accident Fund
• Loss Of Earning Capacity
• Contributory Negligence
• Trusts For Minors
• Road-accident-fund
• Future-loss-of-earnings