This Act was repealed on 2018-11-01 by Legal Practice Act, 2014.
There are outstanding amendments that have not yet been applied. See the History tab for more information.
Attorneys Act, 1979
Related documents
- Is amended by General Law Amendment Act, 1996
- Is repealed by Legal Practice Act, 2014
Loading PDF...
This document is 55.9 MB. Do you want to load it?
History of this document
01 November 2018
Repealed by
Legal Practice Act, 2014
04 October 1996 amendment not yet applied
Amended by
General Law Amendment Act, 1996
01 June 1979 this version
Commenced
21 May 1979
Assented to
Cited documents 0
Documents citing this one 522
Gazette
335Judgment
175|
Refusal to comply with a Law Society s70 inspection directive is unjustified and constitutes unprofessional conduct.
* Attorneys Act s70(1) – council’s power to inspect books and records to decide whether to hold an inquiry; inspection scope broader than s71(2).
* Unprofessional conduct – refusal to comply with s70(1) directive constitutes unprofessional conduct (s70(2)).
* Legal professional privilege – client’s privilege; attorney may not unilaterally invoke privilege to defeat inspection.
* Civil procedure – late introduction of new grounds (PAJA/section 33) impermissible; pleadings define issues.
* Appeal procedure – leave to appeal requires reasonable prospects of success.
|
|
Reported
The Court rejected bias and bail‑record challenges but held the High Court wrongly quashed conspiracy counts; charges reinstated.
Constitutional law; right to a fair trial and impartial adjudication — reasonable apprehension of judicial bias; evidence — admissibility of bail‑hearing record and exclusion in interest of fairness; criminal procedure — reservation of questions of law under s 319; Adams rule and its constitutional construction; statutory conspiracy (s 18(2) Riotous Assemblies Act) and extraterritorial conduct where conspiracies planned/organised in South Africa have a real and substantial link with South Africa; military law and jurisdiction; double jeopardy (s 35(3)(m) left for trial court).
|
|
Reported
Court upheld striking off for extensive touting, trust-account failures and lack of fitness to protect the public.
Attorneys — application under s 22(1)(d) Attorneys Act — three-stage inquiry: proof, fitness and strike-off v suspension; Public protection paramount; Touting and large-scale trust-account failures may manifest lack of integrity; Striking-off need not await explicit finding of dishonesty; Appellate interference with discretionary striking-off orders limited.
|
|
Reported
Section 20 unfairly discriminated against attorneys admitted under former ‘homeland’ law; Court read‑in words to cure invalidity.
Constitutional law — equality — unfair discrimination — section 20(1) of the Attorneys Act excludes persons admitted under former ‘homeland’ legislation — differentiation reinforces historical disadvantage and impairs dignity — not justified under s36; Civil procedure — appeals to Constitutional Court after SCA refusal of condonation — rule 19 requires ordinarily appealing against High Court decision; Administrative/enrolment procedure — once law society objects section 20 route is closed and section 15 substantive application required; Remedy — limited declaration of invalidity and reading-in.
|
|
Reported
Appeal dismissed: Full Court’s disciplinary exercise was not misdirected; repayment orders against those struck off set aside.
Admission of Advocates Act s 7(1)(d) – three-stage enquiry (proof; fitness; suspension vs striking off) – double-briefing and overreaching – dishonest charging of full trial fees – appellate interference with discretionary sanction limited to misdirection, caprice or wrong principle – inherent jurisdiction and limits on ordering restitution – recusal/ reasonable apprehension of bias – failure to register for VAT may constitute professional dishonesty.
|
|
Reported
Whether denying a religious exemption for Rastafari cannabis use unjustifiably limits the applicant’s freedom of religion.
Constitutional law — freedom of religion — alleged conflict between criminal prohibition on cannabis and bona fide sacramental use by Rastafari — party asserting or defending a constitutional challenge must place relevant factual material before the court of first instance — appellate courts may receive further evidence in exceptional circumstances. Evidence — admissibility and necessity — need for South-Africa-specific, detailed evidence on religious practice, scale and context of cannabis use, internal regulation, and means of acquisition. Statutory validity and quorums — section 12(1)(b) of the Supreme Court Act (eleven-judge quorum for validity of Acts) declared inconsistent with interim Constitution and invalid from 27 April 1994; SCA not required to sit with eleven judges on this question.
|
|
Directors of a juristic legal practice owe fiduciary duties and may be suspended where trust‑account misappropriation is prima facie established.
Legal Practice Act — directors’ fiduciary duties in juristic legal practices — ignorance of finances not a defence; urgent suspension and appointment of curator bonis to protect trust creditors; rule 7(1) governs challenges to a litigant’s authority to institute proceedings.
|
|
Court held interim suspension was appropriate and ordered full disciplinary enquiry to protect the public pending final determination.
* Attorneys – disciplinary proceedings under s 22(1)(d) Attorneys Act – three-stage enquiry: proof, fitness, and sanction; * Law Society powers – not obliged to exhaust internal disciplinary committee procedures before approaching court; * Interim relief – court as custos morum may suspend practitioner pending full enquiry to protect public interest; * Trust/estate misappropriation, improper contingency fees and alleged fraud by practitioner.
|
|
Reported
Court increased the applicant's general damages award and reduced the contingency deduction for future earnings.
Medical negligence – birth hypoxic-ischaemic brain injury – quantum of damages: general damages distinct from medical expense awards; determination of appropriate award for 'twilight' awareness cases; contingency deduction for future loss of earnings – vicissitudes of life – need for rational justification, 20% appropriate in this case.
|
|
Reported
Whether PMSA balances are trust property or scheme assets and whether the Registrar’s rejection was materially influenced by an error of law.
• Medical Schemes Act – financial arrangements – section 35(9)(c) – PMSA balances to be reflected as liabilities on scheme balance sheet.
• Financial Institutions (Protection of Funds) Act – definition of ‘trust property’ – does not, by operation of law, render PMSA funds trust property absent an express trust agreement.
• Administrative law – PAJA section 6(2)(d) – decision materially influenced by an error of law where Registrar relied exclusively on an erroneous judicial decision (Omnihealth).
• Accounting and solvency – statutory solvency requirement (s35(3)) and practical accounting consequences of treating PMSAs as off-balance-sheet trust assets.
• Registrar circulars under s37 – circulars deriving their force from a judicial decision fall with that decision for purposes of a review of a specific enforcement decision; circulars remain binding unless and until set aside where appropriate challenge not brought.
|
Act
5|
Dispute Resolution and Mediation
·
Environment, Climate and Wildlife
|
|
Finance and Money
|
|
Business, Trade and Industry
·
Energy and Natural Resources
·
Environment, Climate and Wildlife
·
Finance and Money
|
|
Dispute Resolution and Mediation
|
|
Agriculture and Land
|
By-law
2|
Agriculture and Land
|
|
Agriculture and Land
·
Infrastructure and Transportation
|
General Notice
1|
Dispute Resolution and Mediation
|
Government Notice
1|
Dispute Resolution and Mediation
|