Pieter Paul Le Roux and Another v Johannes G 
` Coetzee and Seuns and Another

dc.date.accessioned	2023-04-20T07:13:18Z
dc.date.available	2023-04-20T07:13:18Z
dc.date.issued	2023-04-11
dc.identifier.citation	[2023] ZACC 46
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/38264
dc.title	Pieter Paul Le Roux and Another v Johannes G ` Coetzee and Seuns and Another	en_US
dc.identifier.casenumber	CCT 117/22
dc.date.hearing	16 May 2023 (Tuesday)
dc.contributor.judge	Kollapen J
dc.date.judgment	18 December 2023
dc.link.judgment	https://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/id/63020/[PDF%20-%20Judgment]%20CCT%20117-22%20Le%20Roux%20v%20Coetzee%20(18.12.23).pdf
dc.concourt.synopsis	Prescription Act 68 of 1969 — section 12(3) — clients’ professional negligence claim against legal practitioner — knowledge of facts may include knowledge of a legal conclusion — exception to the general rule
dc.concourt.casehistory	On appeal from the Supreme Court of Appeal (hearing an appeal from the High Court of South Africa, Northern Cape Division, Kimberley)

Files in this item

Application for leave to appeal to the Concourt.pdf ( 1.563Mb )

Respondents' Answering Affidavit.pdf ( 1.301Mb )

Respondents' written submissions.pdf ( 1.346Mb )

Applicants' Written Submissions.pdf ( 2.118Mb )

Applicants' Written Submissions (directions).pdf ( 4.681Mb )

Respondents' written submissions.pdf ( 1.346Mb )

Applicant's main submissions.pdf ( 2.118Mb )

Respondents submissions in response to directions.pdf ( 738.7Kb )

[PDF - Judgment] CCT 117-22 Le Roux v Coetzee (18.12.23).pdf ( 837.5Kb )

[PDF - Media summary] CCT 117-22 Le Roux and another v Coetzee (18.12.23).pdf ( 353.5Kb )