Mziako v Northern Cape Society of Advocates (1637/17) [2018] ZANCHC 64 (7 September 2018)

Mziako v Northern Cape Society of Advocates (1637/17) [2018] ZANCHC 64 (7 September 2018)

The court found that the applicant failed to satisfy the requirements for leave to appeal under section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act. The grounds raised by the applicant were either misconstrued or did not demonstrate a reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion. The applicant's arguments regarding jurisdiction, locus standi, and the relevance of his previous convictions were addressed in the original judgment, which was incorporated by reference. The court held that the applicant's non-disclosure of material facts and previous convictions, as well as his misleading statements, justified the order striking him off the roll. There was no compelling reason...

Citation
[2018] ZANCHC 64
Parties
Applicant: Moses Sipho Mziako; Respondent: Northern Cape Society of Advocates
Court
Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 September 2018
Case Number
1637/17
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment Striking Applicant Off the Roll of Advocates.
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Tlaletsi JP, Williams J
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Striking Off Roll, Jurisdiction of High Court, Fit and Proper Person, Locus Standi
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Leave to Appeal Striking Off Roll Jurisdiction of High Court Fit and Proper Person Locus Standi

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Moses Sipho Mziako

Applicant

Northern Cape Society of Advocates

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment Striking Applicant Off the Roll of Advocates.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has satisfied the requirements for leave to appeal under section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act.
  2. 2 Whether the Northern Cape High Court had jurisdiction to entertain the application to strike the applicant off the roll of advocates.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent established locus standi and the court's jurisdiction in its founding affidavit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to satisfy the requirements for leave to appeal under section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act. The grounds raised by the applicant were either misconstrued or did not demonstrate a reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion. The applicant's arguments regarding jurisdiction, locus standi, and the relevance of his previous convictions were addressed in the original judgment, which was incorporated by reference. The court held that the applicant's non-disclosure of material facts and previous convictions, as well as his misleading statements, justified the order striking him off the roll. There was no compelling reason...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the application.