Deeb v Pinter; Shane & Stoler v Munro-Scott t/a House of Bernadi
Jurisdiction | South Africa |
Judge | Kirk-Cohen J |
Judgment Date | 25 October 1983 |
Citation | 1984 (2) SA 507 (W) |
Hearing Date | 06 October 1983 |
Court | Witwatersrand Local Division |
Kirk-Cohen J:
Before me are two applications for judgment by default wherein the plaintiffs, both attorneys, have issued summons for professional fees and disbursements due to them. In neither case is it stated whether or not the fees or disbursements were incurred in Supreme Court litigation or that they have been taxed.
Kirk-Cohen J
In case no 126 the causa is expressed as follows
"Payment of the sum of R3 050 being in respect of professional services rendered and disbursements effected by the plaintiff for and on behalf of the defendant, at the A latter's special instance and request, in and during 1982, being the plaintiff's normal charges, alternatively, fair and reasonable charges, further alternatively, agreed charges."
Thus, in this matter, the causa is a contractual mandate completed with an obligation on the client to pay the normal B fees, fair and reasonable fees or agreed upon fees for the services rendered.
In the second matter, matter No 149, the causa is set out as follows - I read prayer 1 -
"Payment of the sum of R1 758,49 being in respect of professional services rendered by the plaintiff to the defendant, including disbursements made by the plaintiff C for and on behalf of the defendant or at the defendant's special instance and request during the period November 1981 to August 1982."
This summons does not allege that the amount of the fees claimed constitutes the normal, fair or reasonable fees or agreed upon fees for the services rendered.
D The question has arisen what the position now is since the repeal of Law 12 of 1899 (T). Section 2 of that law provided:
"Geene kostenrekening in rechtszaken is in rechten invorderbaar dan nadat zij behoorlyk getaxeerd is."
The effect of this provision was dealt with in cases such as Alison v Massel and Massel 1954 (4) SA 569 (T); Kruger v Resnik E 1955 (3) SA 378 (A) and Cilliers v Giliomee 1958 (1) SA 387 (T). In these cases it was held that, by reason of the provisions of s 2, no attorney could sue for professional fees rendered in respect of Supreme Court litigation without taxation of the relevant bills.
F However, Law 12 of 1899 was repealed by Act 36 of 1976 without any substitution of any similar provision.
I now consider the result of the repeal of Law 12 of 1899. In my opinion the causa in these two matters is a mandate duly executed by an attorney on behalf of his client; it is alleged in both matters that the contract was duly performed and...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Blakes Maphanga Inc v Outsurance Insurance Co Ltd
...SA 107 (T): referred to De Beer v Kotze 1913 CPD 252: referred to D Deeb v Pinter; Shane & Stoler v Munro-Scott t/a House of Bernadi 1984 (2) SA 507 (W): referred Dumah v Klerksdorp Town Council 1951 (4) SA 519 (T): referred to Fatti's Engineering Co (Pty) Ltd v Vendick Spares (Pty) Ltd 196......
-
Van der Poel v Du Plessis en 'n Ander
...met sy kliënt oor gelde ooreenkom, is taksasie nie nodig nie. [Vgl Deeb v Pinter Shane & Stoler v Munro Scott t/a House of Bernadi 1984 2 SA 507 (W); Chapman Dyer Miles & Moorhead Inc v Highmark Investment Holdings CC and Others 1998 3 SA 608 (D&C)]. Eweneens, as die partye ooreenkom op 'n ......
-
Chapman Dyer Miles & Moorhead Inc v Highmark Investment Holdings CC and Others
...Chemfos Ltd v Plaasfosfaat (Pty) Ltd 1985 (3) SA 106 (A): referred to Deeb v Pinter; Shane & Stoler v Munro-Scott t/a House of Bernadi 1984 (2) SA 507 (W): dictum at 509B--C applied E Goolam Mohamed v Janion (1908) 29 NLR 304: referred Incorporated Law Society v Lakofski 1939 TPD 289: consi......
-
Chapman Dyer Miles & Moorhead Inc v Highmark Investment Holdings CC and Others
...by another, where this is put in issue by the client.' D In Deeb v Pinter; Shane & Stoler v Munro-Scott t/a House of Bernadi 1984 (2) SA 507 (W) at 509B--C, Kirk-Cohen J '. . . (A)n attorney is entitled to sue for his fees and disbursements including those incurred in Supreme Court litigati......
-
Blakes Maphanga Inc v Outsurance Insurance Co Ltd
...SA 107 (T): referred to De Beer v Kotze 1913 CPD 252: referred to D Deeb v Pinter; Shane & Stoler v Munro-Scott t/a House of Bernadi 1984 (2) SA 507 (W): referred Dumah v Klerksdorp Town Council 1951 (4) SA 519 (T): referred to Fatti's Engineering Co (Pty) Ltd v Vendick Spares (Pty) Ltd 196......
-
Van der Poel v Du Plessis en 'n Ander
...met sy kliënt oor gelde ooreenkom, is taksasie nie nodig nie. [Vgl Deeb v Pinter Shane & Stoler v Munro Scott t/a House of Bernadi 1984 2 SA 507 (W); Chapman Dyer Miles & Moorhead Inc v Highmark Investment Holdings CC and Others 1998 3 SA 608 (D&C)]. Eweneens, as die partye ooreenkom op 'n ......
-
Chapman Dyer Miles & Moorhead Inc v Highmark Investment Holdings CC and Others
...Chemfos Ltd v Plaasfosfaat (Pty) Ltd 1985 (3) SA 106 (A): referred to Deeb v Pinter; Shane & Stoler v Munro-Scott t/a House of Bernadi 1984 (2) SA 507 (W): dictum at 509B--C applied E Goolam Mohamed v Janion (1908) 29 NLR 304: referred Incorporated Law Society v Lakofski 1939 TPD 289: consi......
-
Chapman Dyer Miles & Moorhead Inc v Highmark Investment Holdings CC and Others
...by another, where this is put in issue by the client.' D In Deeb v Pinter; Shane & Stoler v Munro-Scott t/a House of Bernadi 1984 (2) SA 507 (W) at 509B--C, Kirk-Cohen J '. . . (A)n attorney is entitled to sue for his fees and disbursements including those incurred in Supreme Court litigati......