Mungo Soggot
THE lawyer representing Bernadette Gibson – the woman who suffered vaginal acid burns – has petitioned the Appellate Division for a higher damages award, claiming she is mentally unstable.
Gibson, bankrupted after pursuing an ambitious multi-million-rand claim in the supreme court, said this week she did not know lawyer Peter Soller had filed the petition.
She claimed her relations with Soller, whose handling of her case raised eyebrows in legal circles, had deteriorated since the trial ended in June. Soller denied this.
Gibson was landed with a R400 000 bill when the Rand Supreme Court rejected her claim of R3,2-million for injuries caused by the negligent application of acid to her vagina by her doctor, Joshua Berkowitz of the Rand Clinic.
The clinic, ordered by the court to pay her R131 000, had offered to settle the matter out of court for R275 000 – an offer Soller rejected, claiming he was acting on Gibson’s instructions.
Gibson said Soller had not told her how much she would have to pay, but had said bailiffs could arrive at her house at any time to attach her assets.
Soller denied this, telling the Mail & Guardian to “very carefully take note of the fact that Bernadette’s moods and state of mind may well be suspect, arising directly from the injuries she has sustained”.
In his Appellate Division petition, Soller said Gibson’s psychiatrist, Michael Slutzkin, claimed Gibson “cannot be relied upon or trusted to make the right decisions in relation to her own life and that she has been robbed of the capacity to evaluate any situation rationally …
“The effects of the medication which she takes forces her into a situation whereby your petitioner spends at least three quoters [sic] of each day and night in her own bed.”
But Soller said this week that Gibson had signed the Appellate Division document after her “professional medical adviser had certified that she was in a position to file the petition”.
The petition follows the supreme court’s decision to reject Soller’s request for leave to appeal. In rejecting his appeal application, Judge Claassen of the Rand Supreme Court said it was in the best interests of Gibson not to pursue the matter any further.
During the case Soller took two-thirds of a R130 000 interim payment to Gibson by the defendants to pay himself and his counsel Peter Buirski, whom he later discharged. It emerged under cross-examination that he had previously agreed to take only 25% of whatever she was awarded.
Gibson said that despite this agreement Soller had repeatedly telephoned her to demand she pay expert witnesses who had given evidence on her behalf. Soller has not paid at least two of these witnesses.
“I feel done in by my lawyer, the judges, the other side’s lawyer … I have lost everything,” said Gibson, who is undergoing treatment and taking medication for her mental state. She said that she had nothing more to lose by trying her luck in Bloemfontein. She said, however, that she was unable to take legal action against Soller as she did not have the money to do so. She had only had sporadic contact with him through his secretary.
Soller said Gibson had voluntarily signed the petition. “She is clearly wrong and confused,” he said.
Soller said counsel had also advised him to reject the out-of-court settlement.