Selota and Another v Law Society of the Northern Provinces and Another (16434/2017) [2017] ZAGPPHC 1228 (15 December 2017)

Selota and Another v Law Society of the Northern Provinces and Another (16434/2017) [2017] ZAGPPHC 1228 (15 December 2017)

The court found that the Law Society's disciplinary committee's decision constitutes administrative action as defined by PAJA, given its exercise of public power under statutory authority and its impact on rights. The applicants' grounds for review were rejected because the committee did not conduct a fee assessment but rather disciplined the applicants for overreaching and overcharging based on unchallenged evidence. The applicants failed to appear before the committee or provide valid justification, and did not challenge the correctness of the committee's decision at the appropriate stage. The disciplinary process was procedurally fair and rational, and the reliance on Rule 28.1.3 was...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 1228
Parties
Applicant: Mamolazelo Alfred Selota; Applicant: MA Selota Attorneys; Respondent: Law Society of the Northern Provinces; Respondent: Iris Ramasela Maropola
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 December 2017
Case Number
16434/2017
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application for review dismissed with costs.
Judges
Mokoena
Legal Topics
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Disciplinary Proceedings, Fee Assessment, Unprofessional Conduct
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Disciplinary Proceedings Fee Assessment Unprofessional Conduct

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mamolazelo Alfred Selota

Applicant

MA Selota Attorneys

Applicant

Law Society of the Northern Provinces

Respondent

Iris Ramasela Maropola

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the decision of the Law Society's disciplinary committee constitutes administrative action subject to review under PAJA.
  2. 2 Whether the Law Society unlawfully conducted a fee assessment without the applicants' consent in a litigious matter.
  3. 3 Whether the disciplinary committee's finding of unprofessional conduct was rational and procedurally fair.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Law Society's disciplinary committee's decision constitutes administrative action as defined by PAJA, given its exercise of public power under statutory authority and its impact on rights. The applicants' grounds for review were rejected because the committee did not conduct a fee assessment but rather disciplined the applicants for overreaching and overcharging based on unchallenged evidence. The applicants failed to appear before the committee or provide valid justification, and did not challenge the correctness of the committee's decision at the appropriate stage. The disciplinary process was procedurally fair and rational, and the reliance on Rule 28.1.3 was...

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The applicants' application for review is dismissed.
  • The applicants are ordered to pay the costs.