Cape Bar Council v Visser (5722/13) [2013] ZAWCHC 139 (27 August 2013)

Cape Bar Council v Visser (5722/13) [2013] ZAWCHC 139 (27 August 2013)

The court found that the respondent's conduct—accepting instructions directly from a member of the public, performing functions reserved for attorneys, receiving and failing to account for trust money, and ignoring repeated correspondence—was established on a preponderance of probabilities. The respondent's actions demonstrated dishonesty and a disregard for professional rules, including the referral practice and trust account requirements. The respondent failed to provide any explanation or defence, despite adequate warnings. The court held that such conduct rendered the respondent unfit to practise as an advocate and justified removal from the roll. The court declined to award attorney...

Citation
[2013] ZAWCHC 139
Parties
Applicant: Cape Bar Council; Respondent: Roelof Stephanus Visser
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 August 2013
Case Number
5722/13
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Striking Off Advocate From Roll
Outcome
The respondent's name is removed from the roll of advocates; costs awarded to the applicant on the ordinary scale; judgment to be forwarded to the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Judges
T Ndita, PAL Gamble
Legal Topics
Admission of Advocates Act, Fit and Proper Person, Misconduct by Legal Practitioner, Referral Practice, Trust Account Requirements
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Admission of Advocates Act Fit and Proper Person Misconduct by Legal Practitioner Referral Practice Trust Account Requirements

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cape Bar Council

Applicant

Roelof Stephanus Visser

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Striking Off Advocate From Roll

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's conduct constitutes misconduct justifying removal from the roll of advocates.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent is a fit and proper person to continue practising as an advocate.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's acceptance of instructions directly from a member of the public and handling of trust money violated professional rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent's conduct—accepting instructions directly from a member of the public, performing functions reserved for attorneys, receiving and failing to account for trust money, and ignoring repeated correspondence—was established on a preponderance of probabilities. The respondent's actions demonstrated dishonesty and a disregard for professional rules, including the referral practice and trust account requirements. The respondent failed to provide any explanation or defence, despite adequate warnings. The court held that such conduct rendered the respondent unfit to practise as an advocate and justified removal from the roll. The court declined to award attorney...

Court Disposition

The respondent's name is removed from the roll of advocates; costs awarded to the applicant on the ordinary scale; judgment to be forwarded to the Director of Public Prosecutions.

Orders

  • The name of Mr Roelof Stephanus Visser is removed from the roll of advocates.
  • Mr Visser is to pay the Cape Bar Council's costs of suit, including those occasioned by the employment of two counsel.