In the South African decision of Hoffman v South African Airways 2001 (1) SA 1 (CC); [2000] ZACC 17, the view was expressed:“An amicus curiae assists the court by furnishing information or argument regarding questions of law or fact. An amicus is not a party to litigation, but believes that ...
In the South African decision of Hoffman v South African Airways 2001 (1) SA 1 (CC); [2000] ZACC 17, the view was expressed:
“An amicus curiae assists the court by furnishing information or argument regarding questions of law or fact. An amicus is not a party to litigation, but believes that the court's decision may affect its interest. The amicus differs from an intervening party who has a direct interest in the outcome of the litigation and is therefore permitted to participate as a party to the matter.
An amicus joins proceedings, as its name suggests, as a friend of the court. It is unlike a party to litigation who is forced into the litigation and thus compelled to incur costs. It joins in the proceedings to assist the court because of its expertise on or interest in the matter before the court. It chooses the side it wishes to join, unless requested by the court to urge a particular position. An amicus, regardless of the side it joins, is neither a loser nor a winner and is generally not entitled to be awarded costs.”...,.
Costs are not to be awarded to an amicus curiae except in extraordinary circumstances:
See In re: Prosecutor-General, Zimbabwe on his Constitutional Independence and Protection from Direction and Control 2017 (1) ZLR 107 (CC)…, and Ndlovu and Anor v Maunze and Others 2006 (2) ZLR 324 (H)…,.
