Tlotlego (2017/34672), Ex parte [2017] ZAGPJHC 376 (8 December 2017)

Tlotlego (2017/34672), Ex parte [2017] ZAGPJHC 376 (8 December 2017)

The court held that the requirement in the practice manual for applicants to prove a payment arrangement with the university is unnecessary and not supported by statute. Section 3 of the Admission of Advocates Act 74 of 1964 sets out the requirements for admission, which do not include the production of a degree certificate or proof of payment arrangements. The court found that insisting on such proof unfairly victimises graduates who are unable to pay their fees and impairs their dignity and access to the profession. The debtor-creditor relationship between student and university is not a matter for the courts to police in the context of professional admission. The law must be flexible...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPJHC 376
Parties
Applicant: Tsagae Tlotlego
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 December 2017
Case Number
2017/34672
Procedural Posture
Ex Parte Application / Admission of Advocate
Outcome
Application granted. The applicant is admitted as an advocate.
Judges
M Victor, Mangena
Legal Topics
Admission of Advocates, Poverty and Access to Profession, Practice Directives, Debtor Creditor Relationship, Constitutional Fairness, Access to Justice
Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Labour Law Admission of Advocates Poverty and Access to Profession Practice Directives Debtor Creditor Relationship Constitutional Fairness +1 more

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tsagae Tlotlego

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Ex Parte Application / Admission of Advocate

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the absence of a degree certificate due to unpaid university fees should bar admission as an advocate.
  2. 2 Whether court practice directives requiring proof of payment arrangements with universities are constitutionally valid.
  3. 3 Whether courts should act as gatekeepers in the debtor-creditor relationship between law graduates and universities.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the requirement in the practice manual for applicants to prove a payment arrangement with the university is unnecessary and not supported by statute. Section 3 of the Admission of Advocates Act 74 of 1964 sets out the requirements for admission, which do not include the production of a degree certificate or proof of payment arrangements. The court found that insisting on such proof unfairly victimises graduates who are unable to pay their fees and impairs their dignity and access to the profession. The debtor-creditor relationship between student and university is not a matter for the courts to police in the context of professional admission. The law must be flexible...

Court Disposition

Application granted. The applicant is admitted as an advocate.

Orders

  • Applicants to the profession of advocates shall from henceforth only satisfy the provisions of section 3 of the Admission of Advocates Act 74 of 1964.
  • The requirement to prove a payment arrangement with the university is declared unnecessary.