Bosch v Van Vuuren - LexisNexis South Africa

33the proposition that counsel are not closely connected with thelay clients and are accordingly in a position to be more objective.46 I would add also that the duty of legal advisors to distancethemselves in matters of this kind is even greater than incommercial matters. There are two obvious reasons. The first isthat we are dealing with children; not pieces of furniture orsoccer balls. The second is that matters of this kind, arising asthey invariably do from failed relationships, stir up deep andstrongly held emotions. The proper function of legal advisors inthese circumstances entails a proper sifting and the giving ofmaturely considered advice; not the fanning of flames or theaddition of fuel to the fire - as is regrettably often the case. 1247 However, Respondent’s legal team were not afforded theopportunity to address this concern and I am mindful of the factthat cases are often persisted in notwithstanding advice given byattorneys and counsel.48 I accordingly make the following order:12 It appears to have been common cause that the combined costs of the application were well in excess ofR500 000.00. One is forced to question whether the money could not have been put to better use by, forinstance, the establishment of a trust for R’s benefit. Indeed, that is clearly so.