Selota v SALPC (658/2020) [2021] ZASCA 169 (3 December 2021)

Selota v SALPC (658/2020) [2021] ZASCA 169 (3 December 2021)

The court found that the relief sought on appeal, namely a declarator that the appellant was entitled to a Fidelity Fund certificate for 2019, would have no practical effect or result. The appellant had already practised without a certificate, and the suspension order against him was based on this fact. Success on appeal would not alter the basis for the suspension order, nor would it affect the respondent's refusal to issue the certificate. Consequently, the application for condonation and reinstatement of the appeal was dismissed, and the main matter was struck from the roll.

Citation
[2021] ZASCA 169
Parties
Appellant: Mamolatelo Alfred Selota; Respondent: The South African Legal Practice Council
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 December 2021
Case Number
658/2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Division of the High Court, Pretoria
Outcome
Application for condonation and reinstatement of the appeal dismissed; main matter struck from the roll with costs.
Judges
Saldulker, Mathopo, Van der Merwe, Mokgohloa, Weiner
Legal Topics
Fidelity Fund Certificate, Legal Practitioners Regulation, Practical Effect of Appeal, Superior Courts Act Section 16
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Fidelity Fund Certificate Legal Practitioners Regulation Practical Effect of Appeal Superior Courts Act Section 16

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mamolatelo Alfred Selota

Appellant

The South African Legal Practice Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Division of the High Court, Pretoria

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was entitled to a Fidelity Fund certificate for 2019.
  2. 2 Whether the appeal had any practical effect or result within the meaning of section 16(2)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act.
  3. 3 Whether the application for condonation and reinstatement of the appeal should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the relief sought on appeal, namely a declarator that the appellant was entitled to a Fidelity Fund certificate for 2019, would have no practical effect or result. The appellant had already practised without a certificate, and the suspension order against him was based on this fact. Success on appeal would not alter the basis for the suspension order, nor would it affect the respondent's refusal to issue the certificate. Consequently, the application for condonation and reinstatement of the appeal was dismissed, and the main matter was struck from the roll.

Court Disposition

Application for condonation and reinstatement of the appeal dismissed; main matter struck from the roll with costs.

Orders

  • The application for condonation and reinstatement of the appeal is dismissed with costs.
  • The main matter is struck from the roll with costs.