As 2021 begins amidst the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, South Africa (SA) was moved back to Adjusted Alert Level 3, on 29 December 2020, in order to curb the spread of COVID-19. The over two million worldwide lives lost – due to COVID-19 – is an indication of the devastation the pandemic has had on the world, including its economy. As SA attempts to build back its economy, the legal fraternity was not immune to the economic impacts of COVID-19 and will have to grapple with working under the guide of the ‘new normal’. New entrants into the legal job market, candidate legal practitioners, will be applying for positions as the year progresses.
The issue of candidate legal practitioners having a driver’s licence and their own vehicle, as a requirement for acquiring employment, has been a hot topic on a number of occasions in the pages of the De Rebus journal, see –
The Legal Practice Council (LPC) has answered the age-old question by amending its rules and on 9 December 2020, the LPC amended the Rules made under the authority of ss 95(1), 95(3) and 109(2) of the Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014 (as amended) in the following manner:
By the insertion of a new r 22.1.11 relating to candidate attorneys reading as follows:
‘22.1.11 Prohibited provisions in advertisements, interviews and practical vocational training contracts
It is misconduct on the part of:
22.1.11.1 an attorney seeking to employ a candidate legal practitioner to stipulate in an advertisement that it is a requirement that an applicant must be, or to enquire of an applicant whether he/she is, in possession of a valid driver’s licence, or owns or has access to the use of a vehicle for use in the course of his/her prospective employment as a candidate legal practitioner;
22.1.11.2 a principal to enter into a practical vocational training contract with a candidate attorney which incorporates any unreasonable or unusual terms, which terms may include, without limitation, a requirement that the candidate attorney be in possession of a valid driver’s licence, or owns or has access to the use of a vehicle for use in the course of the latter’s service under the contract.’
By the insertion of r 22.2.9 relating to pupils reading as follows:
‘22.2.9 Prohibited provisions in interviews and practical vocational training contracts
It is misconduct on the part of a training supervisor:
22.2.9.1 to enquire of an applicant for a practical vocational training contract whether he/she is in possession of a valid driver’s licence, or owns or has access to the use of a vehicle for use in the course of his/her prospective employment as a candidate legal practitioner;
22.2.9.2 to enter into a practical vocational training contract with a pupil which incorporates any unreasonable or unusual terms, which terms may include, without limitation, a requirement that the pupil be in possession of a valid driver’s licence, or owns or has access to the use of a vehicle for use in the course of the latter’s service under the contract.’
In these trying times, the above rule changes will be a welcomed change by candidate legal practitioners. In adherence to the rule changes, De Rebus and Classifieds advertisers will no longer be permitted to stipulate the requirement of a driver’s licence and ownership or access to the use of a vehicle in advertisements.
This article was first published in De Rebus in 2021 (Jan/Feb) DR 3.
