The RAF has a duty to ensure that the provisions of the CFA have been complied with before making payment, says the writer.
By Hennie Klopper
I refer to the article “RAF alleges attorney only paid R10 400” of September 17 which contains an inaccurate statement regarding the fees that legal practitioners are entitled to in terms of the Contingency Fees Act 66 of 1997 (CFA).
The RAF has consistently claimed that legal practitioners are entitled to and retain 25% of the amount recovered.
This is incorrect. The CFA provides that a practitioner is legally only entitled to a contingency fee which does not exceed 25% of the amount recovered, or double his/her normal fee, whichever is the lesser amount.
The 25% is not the fee but constitutes a cap on the maximum fee that may be charged.
The determination of the normal fee is regulated by the rules of the courts in the form of prescribed tariffs.
In addition, in order to be entitled to a contingency fee, the provisions of the CFA have to be complied with.
This includes confirmatory affidavits by the client and the practitioner, and the vetting of the contingency fee agreement by the courts and professional bodies.
The RAF has a duty to ensure that the provisions of the CFA have been complied with before making payment. Furthermore, the RAF does not deal with medico-legal claims.
Klopper is a Practising Attorney
Cape Times
Related Topics: