Seima N.O and Others v Master of High Court Johannesburg and Others (2022/045994) [2025] ZAGPJHC 686 (7 July 2025)

Seima N.O and Others v Master of High Court Johannesburg and Others (2022/045994) [2025] ZAGPJHC 686 (7 July 2025)

The court found that Samnakay Attorneys advanced serious and defamatory allegations against the trustees that were unsupported by any evidence and were later revealed to be patently false. The attorneys failed to provide any proper explanation or justification for these allegations, despite being given the opportunity to do so. The affidavits prepared by Samnakay Attorneys were replete with incorrect and false statements, and the attorney involved would have been aware of their falsity. The conduct of Samnakay Attorneys constituted a gross disregard for their professional responsibilities, was egregious and inappropriate, and amounted to an abuse of the judicial process. The court held...

Citation
[2025] ZAGPJHC 686
Parties
Applicant: Simon Matleshe Seima N.O.; Applicant: Taryn Jane Neizel N.O.; Applicant: Nurjehan Abdool Gafaar Omar N.O.; Applicant: Sibusiso Nduna N.O.; Respondent: The Master of the High Court, Johannesburg; Respondent: Ntuwiseni Netshitahame N.O.; Respondent: Wian Stander; Respondent: Zarco Formwork and Scaffolding CC; Respondent: Sunhill Car Wash CC; Respondent: Sunhill Liquors CC
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 July 2025
Case Number
2022/045994
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Confirmation of Rule Nisi and Determination of Punitive Costs Order
Outcome
Rule Nisi confirmed. Samnakay Attorneys ordered to pay costs on a punitive scale jointly and severally with the third to sixth respondents.
Judges
Sawma AJ
Legal Topics
Punitive Costs, De Bonis Propriis, Trustee Removal, Professional Misconduct, Insolvency Act, Abuse of Process
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Punitive Costs De Bonis Propriis Trustee Removal Professional Misconduct Insolvency Act Abuse of Process

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Simon Matleshe Seima N.O.

Applicant

Taryn Jane Neizel N.O.

Applicant

Nurjehan Abdool Gafaar Omar N.O.

Applicant

Sibusiso Nduna N.O.

Applicant

The Master of the High Court, Johannesburg

Respondent

Ntuwiseni Netshitahame N.O.

Respondent

Wian Stander

Respondent

Zarco Formwork and Scaffolding CC

Respondent

Sunhill Car Wash CC

Respondent

Sunhill Liquors CC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Confirmation of Rule Nisi and Determination of Punitive Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Samnakay Attorneys should be ordered to pay costs on a punitive scale for advancing false and defamatory allegations against the trustees.
  2. 2 Whether the Rule Nisi issued on 11 October 2023 should be confirmed.
  3. 3 Whether the conduct of the attorneys constituted a gross disregard for professional responsibilities justifying a de bonis propriis costs order.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Samnakay Attorneys advanced serious and defamatory allegations against the trustees that were unsupported by any evidence and were later revealed to be patently false. The attorneys failed to provide any proper explanation or justification for these allegations, despite being given the opportunity to do so. The affidavits prepared by Samnakay Attorneys were replete with incorrect and false statements, and the attorney involved would have been aware of their falsity. The conduct of Samnakay Attorneys constituted a gross disregard for their professional responsibilities, was egregious and inappropriate, and amounted to an abuse of the judicial process. The court held...

Court Disposition

Rule Nisi confirmed. Samnakay Attorneys ordered to pay costs on a punitive scale jointly and severally with the third to sixth respondents.

Orders

  • The Rule Nisi issued on 11 October 2023 is confirmed.
  • Samnakay Attorneys are directed to pay the costs of this application, jointly and severally with the third to sixth respondents, on a punitive scale between attorney and own client, including the cost of two counsel where so employed.