Court Rulings

Monday, 31 May 2010 08:45

The Taxing Master has to give effect to a Court Order or an Agreement

The Taxing Master has to give effect to an order of court or agreement between the parties and may not make such an order by proceeding with a taxation without a court order.

Hugo v Hugo 1947 (1) SA 325 (O) at 329 – An order for costs in a divorce action does not include the costs of the interlocutory applications, such as applications for maintenance pendente lite or an application for a contribution towards costs (unless of course the costs of the proceedings were made costs in the cause.

In the same sense, the court has to specifically order what is to happen to the wasted costs of a postponement.

The principle therefor is the court has to give the Taxing Master directions by way of a court order) as to what is to happen with the costs. The Taxing Master has no discretion in this regard.

Friday, 07 May 2010 07:46

Rule 70 Amendment - Notice to Tax a Bill of Costs - How it is applied in practice

The party presenting the bill of costs will serve the bill together with the Notice of Intention to Tax Bill of Costs on the other side who then has 10 days to inspect the file and 20 days in which to file their notice to oppose together with their clearly marked bill of costs with reasons clearly stated thereon. If no opposition is filed within the 20 days, the Taxing Master will still allocate a date for taxation but the opposing side will be shown the door at the taxation and it will be taxed unopposed.

Friday, 08 May 2009 11:00

VAT Explained on party and party costs

The issue of claiming VAT on fees and disbursements in your bill depends on the question whether you will be out of pocket or not.

The scenario is as follows:
A. You are a VAT vendor, you receive a tax invoice for R100-00 +VAT, you pay the VAT and claim it back, you are out of pocket with R100-00 – you claim the R100-00 in the bill, it is taxed and R100-00 is refunded to you (or a % thereof) – it is not income for which you have supplied goods or services, you have not issued a tax invoice so you do not have to declare it and pay any VAT on it to SARS. The unsuccessful litigant pays R100-00 in terms of the taxed bill - no claim for VAT against SARS. SARS received R14-00 from the supplier of goods or services and paid it back to you – not out of pocket.

B. You are not a VAT vendor, you receive a tax invoice for R100-00 +VAT, you pay the VAT but cannot claim it back, you are out of pocket with R114-00 – you claim the R100-00 + VAT in the bill, it is taxed and R100-00 + VAT is refunded to you (or a % thereof) – it is not income for which you have supplied goods or services, you have not issued a tax invoice so you do not have to declare it and pay any VAT on it to SARS, you receive no benefit, your out of pocket expenses (R100-00 + VAT ) or a portion thereof is merely refunded. The unsuccessful litigant pays R114-00 in terms of the taxed bill but has no claim for VAT against SARS, because there is no tax invoice, no goods sold or services rendered. SARS received R14-00 from the supplier or goods and/or services – not out of pocket.

Tuesday, 10 February 2009 17:08

VAT issue on party and party bills of costs.

REPORTED CASE EXPLAINING THE ISSUE OF VAT ON A PARTY AND PARTY BILL OF COSTS

Tuesday, 10 February 2009 13:26

The difference between party and party costs and attorney and client costs are becoming a problem.

PARTY AND PARTY COSTS

Party and Party costs are those costs recoverable from the other side provided there is a costs order or agreement to pay the costs. The following also constitutes only Party and Party costs and nothing more:

Sunday, 04 January 2009 16:00

Party and party bill of costs.

In a party and party bill of costs no charge can be claimed for perusing 'heads of argument' prepared by counsel as an aid to argument, and delivered by him to his opponent through the latter's instructing attorneys.

Sunday, 04 January 2009 15:45

The use of the tariff simply as a guide is restricted to non-litigious matters.

Regard being had to the Notes preceding the tariff contained in the First Schedule to Rule 24 of the Rules of Court for all Divisions promulgated by Government Notice 2835 on 12th December, 1952, the use of the tariff simply as a guide is restricted to non-litigious matters and does not confer a discretion on the taxing master to treat the tariff simply as a guide when taxing a party and party bill of costs.

Rulings
Latest cost rulings

Case Law
Browse our extensive online case law

Services
Find Out more about us

Newsflashes
Our latest sound bytes

Testimonials
See what our clients say about us

POPIA Act
View our Privacy Policy

Latest Articles

Settlement of bills of costs subject to payment conditions - business policy
Please note that it is our policy that we do not enter into payment conditions of the amount negotiated of any bill of costs. Any…

in Company News
Cloud Partnerships and Subscribers
Our association with our Maltese Cloud partners - Matlo International Limited - has been running for many years and we have to date archived over…

in Company News

Search

Popular Case FIles

High Court Tariff 1 November 2017	21,602
in Court tariffs in South Africa
Rule 70 Amendment - 12 March 2010 v1	5,731
in Court tariffs in South Africa
2002 Magistrate's Court Tariff	4,856
in Court tariffs in South Africa
Amendmend to High Court telephone calls ...	2,808
in Court tariffs in South Africa
2009 Magistrate's Court Tariff	833
in Court tariffs in South Africa