Claassen and Another v The Free State Law Society and Others (5940/2017) [2018] ZAFSHC 148 (12 April 2018)

Claassen and Another v The Free State Law Society and Others (5940/2017) [2018] ZAFSHC 148 (12 April 2018)

The application is premature and cannot succeed. The Law Society must be allowed to conduct its investigations and disciplinary procedures without undue interference or pressure from the Court. There is no evidence that the Society is neglecting its duties. The relief sought is impractical, as compelling the Society to bring an application before its investigations are complete would not serve the interests of justice. The application is dismissed, and costs are awarded to the Society on an attorney and client scale, including costs for previous postponements. No costs are awarded to the Second and Third Respondents.

Citation
[2018] ZAFSHC 148
Parties
Applicant: A C Claassen; Applicant: Joluza Boerdery (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: The Free State Law Society; Respondent: F J Senekal; Respondent: Matsepes Incorporated
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 April 2018
Case Number
5940/2017
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs awarded to the First Respondent on an attorney and client scale, including costs for postponements. No costs awarded to Second and Third Respondents.
Judges
P J Loubser
Legal Topics
Attorneys Act Section 22, Disciplinary Proceedings, Fit and Proper Person, Urgent Interdict, Costs Award
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Attorneys Act Section 22 Disciplinary Proceedings Fit and Proper Person Urgent Interdict Costs Award

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

A C Claassen

Applicant

Joluza Boerdery (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

The Free State Law Society

Respondent

F J Senekal

Respondent

Matsepes Incorporated

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Free State Law Society should be compelled to launch an application to suspend the Second Respondent from practising as an attorney and to take control of the Third Respondent's trust account.
  2. 2 Whether the application is urgent and justified under the circumstances.
  3. 3 Whether the Society is neglecting its duties regarding disciplinary action against the Second Respondent.

Ratio Decidendi

The application is premature and cannot succeed. The Law Society must be allowed to conduct its investigations and disciplinary procedures without undue interference or pressure from the Court. There is no evidence that the Society is neglecting its duties. The relief sought is impractical, as compelling the Society to bring an application before its investigations are complete would not serve the interests of justice. The application is dismissed, and costs are awarded to the Society on an attorney and client scale, including costs for previous postponements. No costs are awarded to the Second and Third Respondents.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs awarded to the First Respondent on an attorney and client scale, including costs for postponements. No costs awarded to Second and Third Respondents.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs for the First Respondent on an attorney and client scale, including costs incurred in the postponements on 17 November 2017 and 14 December 2017.
  • No order as to costs is made in relation to the Second and Third Respondents.