Law Society of the Cape Good Hope v Petersen [2011] ZAWCHC 287; ; 12835/2008 (8 June 2011)
The court found that the respondent had not complied with the applicant's rules regarding the submission of audit reports and the closure of the trust account. By consent, the respondent was ordered to submit the required audit report, provide certificates verifying payment of trust creditors and account closure,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2011] ZAWCHC 287
- Parties
- Applicant: Law Society of the Cape of Good Hope; Respondent: Sidney Joseph Petersen
- Court
- Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- 12835/2008
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Final Order
- Outcome
- Application granted by consent; respondent ordered to comply with audit and trust account requirements and pay costs.
- Judges
- Weinkove AJ
- Legal Topics
- Audit Compliance, Trust Account Closure, Costs Order, Contempt of Court
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Law Society of the Cape of Good Hope
Applicant
Sidney Joseph Petersen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Final Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondent complied with the applicant's rules regarding audit reports and trust account closure.
- 2 Whether the respondent should be held in contempt of court for non-compliance with previous orders.
- 3 Whether a punitive costs order is justified in the circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the respondent had not complied with the applicant's rules regarding the submission of audit reports and the closure of the trust account. By consent, the respondent was ordered to submit the required audit report, provide certificates verifying payment of trust creditors and account closure, all within 14 days. The court further ordered that, in the event of non-compliance, the applicant may approach the court for a contempt order, including committal to prison. Costs were awarded against the respondent on a party and party basis, with the applicant reserving the right to seek attorney and client costs if further non-compliance or abuse of process occurred. The court...
Court Disposition
Application granted by consent; respondent ordered to comply with audit and trust account requirements and pay costs.
Orders
- The respondent shall within 14 days submit a final audit report for the relevant period, a certificate verifying payment of all trust creditors, and a certificate of nil balance confirming closure of the trust account.
- In the event of non-compliance, the applicant is authorised to approach the court for a contempt order and committal to prison.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN)
CASE NUMBER: 12835/2008
DATE: 8 JUNE 2011
In the matter between:
THE LAW SOCIETY OF THE CAPE
OF GOOD HOPE ….............................................................................Applicant
and
SIDNEY JOSEPH PETERSEN …........................................Respondent
JUDGMENT WEINKOVE. AJ: In this matter there will be an order in respect of which paragraphs 1 and 2 is by consent. 1. It is ordered that the respondent shall within 14 days of the granting of this order, ensure the submission by the auditor, Mr Barry Lockitch of Wilder Lockitch, of Unit B10, Century Square, Heron Square, Century City, of the following: 1.1. A final audit report complying with the applicant's rules for the period commencing from the first day after the final day of the last audit report filed by the respondent and ending with 14 February 2006. 1.2. A certificate by the aforesaid auditor, verifying that all trust creditors had been paid full. 1.3. A certificate of nil balance from the respondent's bank, confirming that the TrustBank account has been closed. 2. In the event of the respondent not complying with any one or all of the above paragraphs, the appellant is authorised to approach this court on the same papers, duly supplemented as may be required for an order finding that the respondent is in wilful contempt of the aforesaid order and committing him to prison for such period as the court deems appropriate. This paragraph is also by consent of the parties. I am additionally ordering that the respondent pay the ccst cf this application, as between party and party, but I reserve to the applicant the right in the event of the respondent not complying
with this order, to apply to court at its convenience for an order that this aspect of the cost order be amended to read that the respondent pay these costs as between attorney and client. I do this because I consider that there has been an enormous waste of time in this matter and that there is a strong case to be made out for attorney/client costs, but those costs were not claimed in the original application. However, if there is further any abuse of the process of this court by the respondent, then I am reserving to the applicant the right to ask for a punitive order for costs. WEINKOVE. AJ 8 June 2011
JUDGMENT
WEINKOVE. AJ:
In this matter there will be an order in respect of which paragraphs 1 and 2 is by consent.
1. It is ordered that the respondent shall within 14 days of the granting of this order, ensure the submission by the auditor, Mr Barry Lockitch of Wilder Lockitch, of Unit B10, Century Square, Heron Square, Century City, of the following:
1.1. A final audit report complying with the applicant's rules for the period commencing from the first day after the final day of the last audit report filed by the respondent and ending with 14 February 2006.
1.2. A certificate by the aforesaid auditor, verifying that all trust creditors had been paid full.
1.3. A certificate of nil balance from the respondent's bank, confirming that the TrustBank account has been closed.
2. In the event of the respondent not complying with any one or all of the above paragraphs, the appellant is authorised to approach this court on the same papers, duly supplemented as may be required for an order finding that the respondent is in wilful contempt of the aforesaid order and committing him to prison for such period as the court deems appropriate. This paragraph is also by consent of the parties.
I am additionally ordering that the respondent pay the ccst cf this application, as between party and party, but I reserve to the applicant the right in the event of the respondent not complying
with this order, to apply to court at its convenience for an order that this aspect of the cost order be amended to read that the respondent pay these costs as between attorney and client. I do this because I consider that there has been an enormous waste of time in this matter and that there is a strong case to be made out for attorney/client costs, but those costs were not claimed in the original application. However, if there is further any abuse of the process of this court by the respondent, then I am reserving to the applicant the right to ask for a punitive order for costs.
WEINKOVE. AJ
8 June 2011