Wishart and Others v Blieden N.O. and Others (659/2013) [2014] ZASCA 120; [2014] 4 All SA 334 (SCA); 2020 (3) SA 99 (SCA) (19 September 2014)

Wishart and Others v Blieden N.O. and Others (659/2013) [2014] ZASCA 120; [2014] 4 All SA 334 (SCA); 2020 (3) SA 99 (SCA) (19 September 2014)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellants were not clients of the lawyers and had not disclosed any confidential information to them. The principle in South African law, as established in Robinson v Van Hulsteyn Feltham and Ford and followed in subsequent cases, is that restraint is only justified where a...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] ZASCA 120
Parties
Appellant: Grant Logan Wishart; Appellant: Malcolm Grant Wishart; Appellant: Shabier Bhayat; Respondent: The Honourable Mr Justice P Blieden NO; Respondent: Advocate John M Suttner SC; Respondent: Advocate Allan J Eyles; Respondent: Attorney Mr Wessel J J Badenhorst; Respondent: BHP Billiton Energy Coal South Africa Limited; Respondent: Neil McHardy NO; Respondent: The Master of the High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 September 2014
Case Number
659/2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Kwa Zulu Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel where so employed.
Judges
Lewis, Maya, Willis, Swain, Mocumie
Legal Topics
Conflict of Interest, Interdict, Company Directors Liability, Administration of Justice
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Conflict of Interest Interdict Company Directors Liability Administration of Justice

Source-derived case record

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Grant Logan Wishart

Appellant

Malcolm Grant Wishart

Appellant

Shabier Bhayat

Appellant

The Honourable Mr Justice P Blieden NO

Respondent

Advocate John M Suttner SC

Respondent

Advocate Allan J Eyles

Respondent

Attorney Mr Wessel J J Badenhorst

Respondent

BHP Billiton Energy Coal South Africa Limited

Respondent

Neil McHardy NO

Respondent

The Master of the High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Kwa Zulu Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the common law should be developed to restrain lawyers from acting against individuals who were not their direct clients but had interests in companies previously represented by the lawyers.
  2. 2 Whether the appellants, as directors and shareholders, qualify as 'quasi-clients' entitled to protection against adverse representation by former lawyers.
  3. 3 Whether the lawyers possessed confidential information that could prejudice the appellants if used in the inquiry.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellants were not clients of the lawyers and had not disclosed any confidential information to them. The principle in South African law, as established in Robinson v Van Hulsteyn Feltham and Ford and followed in subsequent cases, is that restraint is only justified where a lawyer possesses confidential information that could be misused against a former client. The court declined to extend the common law to cover 'quasi-clients' or individuals with converging interests with former client companies, finding no basis in law or fact for such an extension. The court further found that public policy and the administration of justice did not require...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel where so employed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel where so employed.