Mabuli and Another v South African Legal Practise Council (030312/23) [2025] ZAGPPHC 172 (25 February 2025)

Mabuli and Another v South African Legal Practise Council (030312/23) [2025] ZAGPPHC 172 (25 February 2025)

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the delay in launching the review application. Financial constraints and illness, while understandable, did not justify the extent of the delay, especially as the practice continued to operate. The delay in receiving the record from the respondent did not prevent the applicant from filing the application timeously and supplementing it later. The applicant's claims of prejudice were unconvincing, and no sufficient grounds were shown for condonation. Furthermore, the applicant had no prospects of success on the merits, as the respondent is obliged to approach the court regarding the professional conduct of its...

Citation
[2025] ZAGPPHC 172
Parties
Applicant: Khorommbi Mabuli; Applicant: Mabuli Inc Attorney; Respondent: South African Legal Practise Council
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 February 2025
Case Number
030312/23
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Condonation and Review
Outcome
Application for condonation for late filing of the review application is dismissed with costs on Scale B.
Judges
M M MABESELE, GCAWU-DAMBUZA
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Condonation, Undue Delay Rule, Professional Conduct, Prospects of Success
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Judicial Review Condonation Undue Delay Rule Professional Conduct Prospects of Success

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khorommbi Mabuli

Applicant

Mabuli Inc Attorney

Applicant

South African Legal Practise Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Condonation and Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation for the late filing of the review application should be granted.
  2. 2 Whether the delay in launching the review application was reasonable and adequately explained.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant would suffer prejudice if condonation is refused.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the delay in launching the review application. Financial constraints and illness, while understandable, did not justify the extent of the delay, especially as the practice continued to operate. The delay in receiving the record from the respondent did not prevent the applicant from filing the application timeously and supplementing it later. The applicant's claims of prejudice were unconvincing, and no sufficient grounds were shown for condonation. Furthermore, the applicant had no prospects of success on the merits, as the respondent is obliged to approach the court regarding the professional conduct of its...

Court Disposition

Application for condonation for late filing of the review application is dismissed with costs on Scale B.

Orders

  • Application for condonation for late filing of the review application is dismissed with costs on Scale B.