020 7404 1147

Daniel Dippenaar Called 1996 (SA)

Daniel Dippenaar

Called 1996 (Cape Town, South Africa)
2007 (England and Wales)

 Email  Booking Enquiry


Areas of expertise:

Full spectrum of personal injury litigation with an interest in clinical negligence cases – experienced at multi-track levels. Accustomed to appearing at inquests, in lower and higher courts including appeal and constitutional forums. Knowledgeable in CICA and ADR proceedings.
Special interest in employment law, human rights and constitutional law.

Other areas of practice:

As a barrister of international standing Daniel has been exposed to a broad spectrum of legal work which includes litigation of a corporate nature, commercial aspects, building and other contractual disputes, actions against the police, malicious prosecutions and general common law and regulatory matters. He accepts instructions in criminal cases, particularly when the evidence has a bearing on ensuing civil litigation.


B.Proc. (Baccalaureus Procurationis) – Johannesburg
LL.B. (Baccalaureus Legum) – Johannesburg


Pre-law Daniel gained 13 years of police experience (South Africa). At age 23 he became one of the youngest commissioned police officers in South Africa (lieutenant). Later, then a senior vehicle theft branch commander, he resigned to study law fulltime. He successfully completed two law degrees whilst married; then the father of 2 young boys. He enrolled as an attorney (2 year-articles were required) and later joined the Cape Bar of Advocates after successful pupilage in 1996. He continued to practice at the Cape Bar until the end of 2006 before joining Chambers in London in 2007.

Practice history:

Daniel is dually qualified to practice both in England & Wales (called 2007) and in South Africa (called 1996). He is well known for his ground-breaking work in relation to class actions, multi-party actions and railway litigation reported in cases such as:

Rail Commuter Action Group and Others v Transnet Ltd T/A Metrorail and Others (No 1) 2003 (5) SA 518 (C) – declaratory order and a mandamus; i.e. relief to declare the rights of commuters and to compel the government to introduce reasonable measures to prevent violent attacks on train commuters.

Rail Commuter Action Group and Others v Transnet Ltd T/A Metrorail and Others (No 2) 2003 (5) SA 593 (C) – procedural issues adjudicated by full bench dealing with striking out aspects.

Transnet Ltd t/a Metrorail and Others v Rail Commuters Action Group and Others 2003 (6) SA 349 (SCA) – in three separate judgments by five appeal court justices the first instance judgment was overturned.

Rail Commuters Action Group and Others v Transnet Ltd t/a Metrorail and Others 2005 (2) SA 359 (CC) – Organs of state performing public functions and providing certain public services held accountable for services rendered inconsistent with the constitutional rights of commuters.

Notable personal injury cases include:

Dr Hennie Nagtegaal v Mr Aziz Hussain HQ12X01970 — A difficult case on liability and quantum; the claimant suffering from retrograde and post traumatic amnesia after the onset of injuries sustained when he was knocked
over by a motorbike.

Keely Morgan v Marks & Spencer IUC51166 — Damages resultant from a frozen shoulder and fracture dislocation of the elbow settled for £98,000.

Ventisislav Petrov Bankov v Mr Ian McCowen — Claimant-pedestrian run over by the defendant’s car at a controlled pedestrian crossing.

Amanuel Mengstab v Joseph Agoncillo 2YJ64595 — An overeager martial arts instructor severely fractured his student’s arm when demonstrating an arm-lock.

June Happe v London Borough of Islington 1UC60776 — A particularly difficult highway trip and fall case in which the claimant was unable to point out the offending cobble stone. Evidence of general and systemic lack of maintenance swayed the balance of probabilities in her favour.

Yohnas Mulugetha v Ministry of Defence — A case of alleged police brutality involving a potential claim for exemplary or aggravated damages.

Charles Goult v Andrew Lumb OLA00753 — When a dog tore and ripped off the bottom lip off a young man soon to be married Daniel’s advice was sought. The claimant wanted to know if ‘aesthetic prejudice’ should be acknowledged as a separate head of general damages. To what extent is case law in South African, Canadian and Australian jurisdictions comparable and are they likely, particularly in Charles’ case, to assist England’s courts? These questions will remain unanswered (for now) as the case settled for £210,000 (handicap on the open market valued around £87,000 – total claim reduced by 1/3 on account of contributory negligence).

Veck v MJD Group Limited HQ12X04238 — Under what circumstances could or should a court permit an actuary’s expert report to determine life expectancy of a claimant who smoked and was a long-time diabetic? In this case the impact of the actuary’s expert report will remain uncertain; however, the defendant agreed a substantially higher settlement post receipt of actuarial evidence. The claim settled for £160,000 less than 3 weeks before trial.

Pritiam Singh Patti v East of Anglia Ambulance Service NHS Trust HQ12X02939 — A potentially far reaching judgment was delivered on 4th April 2014 by Master Cook. In this case Daniel argued for relief from sanctions (which was granted) following the late filing (6 weeks) of one of the claimant’s expert reports.

Professional memberships:

Middle Temple Inn
Association of Personal Injury Lawyers
Personal Injury Bar Association
Professional Negligence Bar Association
Employment Lawyers Association
Fluent Afrikaans.

Direct access:
Qualified to do direct access work; Daniel accepts instructions in suitable cases.

Rugby, fitness-training, gardening and wine tasting.