In a matter of Selota the High Court in Pretoria handed down a judgment that a legal practitioner be committed to 12 months’ imprisonment which is wholly suspended for three months on condition that the respondent comply fully with the court order dated 7 February 2020. This was after the respondent was found in contempt of a court order dated 7 February 2020.
The High Court said that the respondent was suspended by the full bench on 7 February 2020 pending finalisation of the application for the removal of his name from the roll of attorneys. The High Court added that the respondent has since exhausted all avenues of appeal against the suspension order. On 22 February 2021, the respondent brought an application for reconsideration to the Constitutional Court (CC) in terms of rule 11(1)(b) of the Rules of the Constitutional Court. The High Court pointed out that the application was dismissed by the CC on 31 March 2021.
The High Court added that on 9 March 2021 the applicant brought an urgent application to interdict the Legal Practice Council from implementing the suspension order. The application was dismissed. Among other things the applicant contended further that notwithstanding the dismissal of his application for leave to appeal in the CC, the respondent continued to practice on his account. The High Court added that the respondent continued practising in contravention of the suspension order. The High Court said that in his answering affidavit the respondent said: ‘The documents that were provided to the sheriff were not random documents, but were documents selected by me so that my trust financial position could be established.’
The High Court added that the respondent refuted the submission by the applicant contended that he did not comply with the court order. The High Court said that it was clear from the papers before the court that the respondent failed to comply with the court order. The High Court pointed out that in Fakie NO v CCII Systems (Pty) Ltd 2006 (4) SA 326 (SCA) it was held that, the test for when disobedience of a civil order constitutes contempt is whether the non-compliance was committed deliberately and mala fide. The High Court said that there is more than obduracy by the respondent to refuse to comply with the court order up to date and this amounts to willfulness not to comply with the court order. The High Court added that the applicant succeeded in showing that the respondent was in contempt of the court order dated 7 February 2020.
Kgomotso Ramotsho Cert Journ (Boston) Cert Photography (Vega) is the news reporter at De Rebus.
This article was first published in De Rebus in 2024 (Nov) DR 47.
