dc.date.accessioned | 2017-04-08T17:17:07Z | |
dc.date.available | 2017-04-08T17:17:07Z | |
dc.date.created | 2014-02-20 | en |
dc.identifier.citation | [2014] ZACC 2 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 2014 (3) SA 134 (CC) | |
dc.identifier.citation | 2014 (4) BCLR 430 (CC) | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/3748 | |
dc.title | Ronald Bobroff & Partners Inc v De La Guerre; South African Association of Personal Injury Lawyers v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Another | en |
dc.title.alternative | CCT122/13 | en |
dc.identifier.casenumber | CCT122/13 | en |
dc.identifier.casenumber | CCT123/13 | |
dc.contributor.judge | The Court | |
dc.date.judgment | 20 February 2014 | |
dc.link.judgment | http://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/handle/20.500.12144/3748/Full%20judgment%20Official%20version%20%2898%20Kb%29-21856.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y | |
dc.concourt.synopsis | Contingency fees – Contingency Fees Act 66 of 1997 – constitutionality of the Act as a whole – constitutionality of sections 2 and 4 of the Act – not unconstitutional. Two applications for leave to appeal concerning the constitutionality of the Contingency Fees Act 66 of 1997 as a whole, or in the alternative, certain sections of it. The Court found there to be no merit in the challenge to the Act as a whole on the basis that the Legislature’s decision to regulate contingency fee agreements in respect of legal practitioners only was not irrational. In respect of the challenge to particular provisions of the Act, the Court characterised this as a challenge based on a limitation to fundamental rights. The Court held that the challenge was without merit because the matter concerned the right of access to justice by legal practitioners’ clients and not a right of the legal practitioners. and because there was no evidence showing that the rights of their clients had been infringed. The applications for leave to appeal were dismissed with costs. Judgment of the Court. Coram: Moseneke ACJ, Skweyiya ADCJ, Cameron J, Dambuza AJ, Froneman J, Jafta J, Madlanga J, Van der Westhuizen J and Zondo J. | |
dc.concourt.casehistory | Two applications for leave to appeal against judgments of the Pretoria High Court: De La Guerre v Ronald Bobroff & Partners Inc and Others (22645/2011) [2013] ZAGPPHC 33 (13 February 2013) and South African Association of Personal Injury Lawyers v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development (32894/12) [2013] ZAGPPHC 34; 2013 (2) SA 583 (GNP); [2013] 2 All SA 96 (GNP) (13 February 2013). |