COSTS DE BONIS PROPRIIS CASELAW.

NB: Njini & Anor v Ngwenya & Anor HB-190-11 Cheda J said the following;

“The common reasons for awarding costs de bonis propriis are where the
legal practitioner is guilty of improper or unreasonable conduct, or lack of
bona fides. In making such determination, some of the factors which should
be taken into account are: (a) the lawyer’s age; (b) his qualifications; (c) his
experience; and (d) his general character and attitude towards his work.
The less experienced a lawyer is, the more sympathy he should receive from
the courts; the actions of the more experienced lawyers may in contrast be
viewed as deliberate.”

M M Pretorius (Pvt) Ltd & Anor v Mutyambizi S-39-12 Ziyambi JA, said,

“A legal practitioner is not engaged by his client to make omissions and to

commit oversights. He is paid for his professional advice and for the use of
his skills in the representation of his client. He is not paid to make mistakes.
These could be costly to his client. He is professionally, ethically and
morally bound to exercise the utmost diligence in handling the affairs of his
client. Where the blame for the numerous defects in an application for
condonation of late noting of an appeal was entirely attributable to the
applicants’ legal practitioner’s flagrant disregard of the rules of court and
his casual attitude, it would be appropriate to make an order that the
practitioner should pay the costs personally.”

In Matamisa v Mutare City Council & Anor 1998 (2) ZLR 439 (S) at 447 E-F
the following was stated.
 “Costs de bonis propriiis will be awarded against a lawyer as an
exceptional measure and in order to penalise him for the conduct of the
case where it has been conducted in a manner involving neglect or
impropriety by himself.”

Omarsha v Karasa 1996 (1) ZLR 584 (H) at 591 per Gillespie J said

“Such costs are only awarded in reasonably grave circumstances. Generally

speaking, dishonesty, mala fides, wilfulness or professional negligence of a
high degree fall into this category.”