Moyo v Minister of Police (749/2014) [2017] ZALMPTHC 2 (6 February 2017)

Moyo v Minister of Police (749/2014) [2017] ZALMPTHC 2 (6 February 2017)

The court found that DBN, an attorney, appeared in the High Court without the required right of appearance certificate as stipulated by the Right of Appearance in Courts Act 62 of 1995. Despite her admission and apology, the court held that ignorance of the law is not an excuse and that her conduct constituted both a criminal offence and unprofessional conduct under section 6 of RACA. The court rejected the argument that the fault lay solely with her principal and found that DBN had a duty to acquaint herself with the legal requirements and to act honestly before the court. Her misrepresentation to the judge, both in chambers and under oath, was deemed intentional and sufficient to...

Citation
[2017] ZALMPTHC 2
Parties
Applicant: Moyo ML; Respondent: Minister of Police
Court
Limpopo High Court, Thohoyandou
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 February 2017
Case Number
749/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Judgment on Disciplinary Referral
Outcome
The matter is referred to the Law Society of the Northern Provinces for investigation of the attorney's conduct under section 6 of the Right of Appearance in Courts Act 62 of 1995.
Judges
Phatudi
Legal Topics
Right of Appearance, Professional Misconduct, Legal Practitioner Ethics
Civil Procedure Right of Appearance Professional Misconduct Legal Practitioner Ethics

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Moyo ML

Applicant

Minister of Police

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Judgment on Disciplinary Referral

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an attorney may appear in the High Court without a right of appearance certificate as required by the Right of Appearance in Courts Act 62 of 1995.
  2. 2 Whether the attorney's conduct in misleading the court constitutes unprofessional conduct and a criminal offence under section 6 of RACA.
  3. 3 Whether the matter should be referred to the relevant professional body for disciplinary action.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that DBN, an attorney, appeared in the High Court without the required right of appearance certificate as stipulated by the Right of Appearance in Courts Act 62 of 1995. Despite her admission and apology, the court held that ignorance of the law is not an excuse and that her conduct constituted both a criminal offence and unprofessional conduct under section 6 of RACA. The court rejected the argument that the fault lay solely with her principal and found that DBN had a duty to acquaint herself with the legal requirements and to act honestly before the court. Her misrepresentation to the judge, both in chambers and under oath, was deemed intentional and sufficient to...

Court Disposition

The matter is referred to the Law Society of the Northern Provinces for investigation of the attorney's conduct under section 6 of the Right of Appearance in Courts Act 62 of 1995.

Orders

  • The registrar is directed to send a copy of this judgment and the affidavit deposed to by DBN to the Law Society of the Northern Provinces.
  • The Law Society of the Northern Provinces is ordered to investigate the conduct of DBN as set out in paragraphs 18 and 21 vis-à-vis the provisions of section 6 of the Right of Appearance in Courts Act 62 of 1995.