Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Siyabonga Gugulethu Galela (Ex parte application) (1294/2023) [2024] ZASCA 176 (13 December 2024)
The Supreme Court of Appeal upheld an appeal against refusal of admission, finding the applicant’s omissions were not intended to deceive and could be condoned.
Vatsha v Johannesburg Society of Advocates (0978/2021) [2023] ZAGPJHC 453 (10 May 2023)
The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate the requisite qualities of honesty, integrity, and full disclosure necessary for admission as an advocate. The applicant's accounts of his criminal conduct were inconsistent and evasive, and he did not provide substantive evidence of self-awareness or reformation of character. The lack of full and frank disclosure, especially regarding the details of his meeting with the Legal Practice Council and the circumstances of his criminal convictions, indicated a deficiency in character. Expressions of remorse were deemed insufficient without c…
Source excerpt
Gaone Jack Siamisang Montshiwa (Ex Parte Application) (672/2021) [2023] ZASCA 19 (3 March 2023)
The Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed an ex parte leave-to-appeal application about admission as a legal practitioner, finding the applicant was not fit and proper.
Rafoneke v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others (3609/2020) [2021] ZAFSHC 229; [2022] 1 All SA 243 (FB); 2022 (1) SA 610 (FB) (16 September 2021)
Section 24(2)(b) of the Legal Practice Act, read with section 115, differentiates between citizens/permanent residents and non-citizens regarding admission as legal practitioners. The court found that while the differentiation is rationally connected to legitimate government purposes—such as regulating the profession, protecting the local job market, and ensuring compliance with immigration and employment laws—the blanket exclusion of non-citizens from admission as non-practising legal practitioners is irrational and unconstitutional. The exclusion does not serve a legitimate governmental pur…
Source excerpt
Alves and Others v Legal Practice Council (7528/19; 6990/19; 6541/19; 6661/19; 6900/19; 3043/19; 6155/19;6156/19; 6845/19) [2019] ZAWCHC 96; 2019 (6) SA 18 (WCC) (31 July 2019)
The court held that transitional section 115 of the Legal Practice Act allowed admitted attorneys to be enrolled as advocates, and ordered their removal from the attorneys’ roll.
Explore more
