Matthews, Ex parte (19471/2003) [2008] ZAGPHC 147 (20 May 2008)

Matthews, Ex parte (19471/2003) [2008] ZAGPHC 147 (20 May 2008)

The court found that the applicant failed to address the specific findings of dishonesty, unprofessional conduct, and breach of trust made in the original judgment. Despite the passage of time and his employment under supervision, the applicant did not demonstrate genuine insight into the defects of character or attitude that led to his removal. His affidavits were inadequate, and he continued to ascribe his misconduct to external factors and youth, rather than accepting personal responsibility. The court held that the applicant had not shown genuine, complete and permanent reformation, nor had he convincingly demonstrated that he is now a fit and proper person to be re-admitted to the...

Citation
[2008] ZAGPHC 147
Parties
Applicant: Terence Edward Dale Matthews
Court
High Courts - Gauteng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 May 2008
Case Number
19471/2003
Procedural Posture
Re Admission Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application for re-admission as attorney, notary and conveyancer refused.
Judges
B.R. Southwood, C.J. Davel
Legal Topics
Attorneys Act, Professional Misconduct, Re Admission of Attorney, Fit and Proper Person, Trust Account Management
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Attorneys Act Professional Misconduct Re Admission of Attorney Fit and Proper Person Trust Account Management

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Terence Edward Dale Matthews

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Re Admission Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated genuine, complete and permanent reformation since being struck off the roll.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has adequately addressed the defects of character or attitude identified in the original judgment.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is now a fit and proper person to be re-admitted as an attorney, notary and conveyancer.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to address the specific findings of dishonesty, unprofessional conduct, and breach of trust made in the original judgment. Despite the passage of time and his employment under supervision, the applicant did not demonstrate genuine insight into the defects of character or attitude that led to his removal. His affidavits were inadequate, and he continued to ascribe his misconduct to external factors and youth, rather than accepting personal responsibility. The court held that the applicant had not shown genuine, complete and permanent reformation, nor had he convincingly demonstrated that he is now a fit and proper person to be re-admitted to the...

Court Disposition

Application for re-admission as attorney, notary and conveyancer refused.

Orders

  • The application for re-admission is dismissed.