Particulars of Disciplinary Hearings

E R Dippenaar Dippenaar (Etienne) Attorneys

REF:2502021 THE PRACTITIONER CHARGED FOR FAILURE TO RESPOND TO COMMUNICATIONS AND FAILURE TO DEAL WITH INSTRUCTIONS

THE IC ON THE 23 JUNE 2021, COMMITTEE FOUND GUILTY IN TERMS OF RULE 12.13 & RULE 12.7 FOR FAILURE TO COMMUNICATE WITH CLIENT.

R Van Rooyen Van Rooyen, Tlhapi, Wessels Inc. Attorneys

REF:15252019 IN A DIVORCE MATTER-PRACTITIONER CAHRGED WITH MOSCUNDUCT FOR FAILURE TO ATTEND TO MATTER DILIGENTLY

THE IC COMMITTEE RECOMEMMENDED THAT THE COMPLAINT BE REFERRED FOR DISCUSSION TO CLARIFY ISSUES IN DISPUTES.

J M Mokoto Mokoto (J.M) Attorney

REF:99462020 IN A DIVORCE MATTER-PRACTITIONER CHARGED WITH HARRASMENT & FAILURE TO ACCOUNT FOR MONEY AND FAILURE TO ATTEND TO MATTER DILIGENTLY.

IC COMMITTEE ON THE 23 JUNE 2021,RECOMMENDED THAT THE COMPLAINT BE DISMISSED ON THE BASIS THAT THE PRACTITIONER HAS GIVEN A REASONABLE EXPLANATION.

P J Pienaar Combrink & Kgatshe Inc. Attorneys

REF:2672020 IN A DIVORCE MATTER-PRATITIONER CAHRGED WITH FAILURE TO ACCOUNT FOR MONEY.

IC COMMTTEE ON THE 23 JUNE 2021,RECOMMENDED THAT THE PRATITIONER IS NOT GUILTY OF MISCONDUCT AND HAS GIVEN A REASONABLE EXPLANATION.

P S Mthini Setshedi, Makgale & Matlapeng Incorporated

REF:11302015 RAF MATTER
,PRATITIONER CHARGED WITH MISCONDUCT FOR FAILURE TO ATTEND TO MATTER DILIGENTLY AND FAILURE TO ACCOUNT FOR MONEY.

THE IC ON THE 23 JUNE 2021.
RECOMMENDED THAT THE COMPLAINT SHOULD BE DISMISSED ON THE BASIS THAT THE PRACTITIONER IS NOT GUILTY OF MISCONDUCT AND THAT A REASONABLE EXPLANATION HAS BEEN GIVEN

F Paul Morebodi-Paul Inc. Attorneys

REF:88782020 AN ESTATE MATTER-PRACTITIONER CHARGED WITH FAILURE TO ACCONT AND FAILURE TO ATTEND MATTER DILIGENTLY.

THE IC ON THE 23 JUNE 2021,RECOMMENDED THAT THE PRACTITIONER IS NOT GUILTY OF MISCONDUCT AND HAS GIVE A REASONABLE EXPLANATION.

P A Sieberhagen Aucamp & Sieberhagen Attorneys

REF:17422019 PRACTITIONER CAHRGED WITH FAILURE TO ATTEND MATTER DILEGENTLY – IN A PROPERTY TRANSACTION MATTER.

IC DISMISSED THE CCOMPLAINT ON THE 23 JUNE 2021,ON THE BASIS THAT THE PRACTITIONER IS NOT GUILTY ON ANY MISCONDUCT,HAS GIVEN A REASONABLE EXPLANATION,NO PROSOECTS OF SUCCESS.

L K Renoster Du Plessis – Viviers Inc. Attorneys

REF:63102020 FAILURE TO ACCOUNT FOR MONEY AND FAILURE TO ATTEND TO MATTER PROPERLY-IN A PROPERTY TRANSACTION MATTER.

THE IC COMMITTEE DISMISSED THE CCOMPLAINT ON THE 23 JUNE 2021,ON THE BASIS THAT THE PRATITIONER WAS FOUND NOT GUILTY AND GIVEN A REASOINABLE EXPLANATION.

TPN Dingiswayo Dingiswayo Thembile Attorneys

REF:97202020 THE PRACTITRIONER CAHRGED WITH MIS CONDUCT FOR FAILURE TO DEAL PROPERLY WITH INSTRUCTIONS.

THE IC COMMITTEE DISMISED THE COMPLAINT ON THE 23 June 2021,DISMISASED THE COMPLAINT ON THE BASIS THAT THE PRACTITIONER WAS FOUND NOT GUILTY AND HAS GIVEN A REASONABLE EXAPLANATION.

C P Zietsman Zietsman Attorneys

REF:90522020 CIVIL MATTER-CLAIM OF A WITNESS FEES-PTRACTITIONER CHARGED FOR FAILURE TO ATTEND TO MATTER DILIGENTLY.

IC DISMISSED THE COMPLAINT ON THE BASIS THAT THE PRACTITIONER WAS NOT FOUND GUILTY OF ANY MISCONDUCT.

O B Kgomo Kgomo Inc. Attorneys

REF:53012019 Property transection matter-practitioner charged for failure to properly deal with instructions.

IC RECOMMENDED THAT THE COMPLAINT BE REFERRED TO DISCUSSION COMMITTEE.

D I Matlapeng Setshedi, Makgale & Matlapeng Incorporated

REF:52652019 RAF MATTER-PRACTITIONER CHARGED WITH FAILURE TO ACCOUNT FOR MONEY.

IC ON THE 23 JUNE 2021,RECOMMENDED THAT THE COMPLAINT BE REFERRED TO DISCUSSION COMMITTEE.

C G Steyn Steyn (C.G) Inc. Attorneys

REF:49562019 DEBT COLLECTION MATTER ,THE PRACTITIONER WAS CHARGED WITH MISCONDUCT FOR FAILURE TO ACCOUNT.

THE IC ON THE 23 JUNE 2021,RECOMMENDED THAT THE COMPLAINT BE REFERRED FOR

C J A Lourens Lourens Attorneys

REF:49532019 Estate matter-practitioner charged with misconduct for failure to attend to matter diligently.

IC ON THE 23 JUNE 2021, RECEOMMENDED THAT THE COMPLAINT BE DISMISSED ON THE BASIS THAT THE PRACTITIONER WAS FOUND NOT GUILTY AND HAS GIVEN A REASONABLE EXPLANATION.

K I Sepeng Sepeng (K.I) Attorneys

REF:70072020 ESTATE MATTER -PRATITIONER CHARGED WITH FAILURE TO DEAL PROPERLY WITH THE INSTRUCTIONS.

IC ON THE 23 JUNE 2021-DISMISEED THE COMPLAINT ON THE BASIS THAT THE PRATITTIONER HAS GIVEN A REASONABLE EXPLANATION.

F C H Pretorius VAN VELDEN-DUFFEY

REF:652019 THE PRACTITIONER CHARGED WITH FMU

THE IC COMMITTEEON THE 23 JUNE 2021 ,RECOMMENDED THAT THE COMPLAINT MUST BE REFERED TO DISCUSSION COMMITTEE FOR CLARITY ON ISSUES.

S M Mogoaneng Legal Aid South Africa (Ga-Rankuwa Justice Centre)

REF:23632017 1) Paragraph 16.2 read with Paragraph 16.3 of the Code, in that you failed to respond timeously and fully to requests from the Gauteng Provincial Office of the Legal Practice Council dated 12 June 2017, 03 August 2017, 12 October 2017 and 27 November 2017 for information and / or documentation which you were able to provide

Attorney appeared and pleaded not guilty.

The Committee FOUND the attorney GUILTY of the charge and issued a WARNING

E M Mahlangu Mahlangu Attorneys

REF:38392017 “In that you are guilty of misconduct in terms of Clause 21 of the Legal Practice Council’s Code of Conduct in that you breached and / or contravened Clause 3.11 of the Code, in that you failed to use your best efforts to carry out work in a competent and timely manner and not take on work which you do not reasonably believe you will be able to carry out in that manner”.

Attorney appeared and pleaded guilty to the charge.

The Committee FOUND the Attorney GUILTY of the charge as pleaded and IMPOSED a FINE of R 3000.00 which is a suspended in full for a period of 3 years on condition that the attorney is not found guilty of a similar charge during the period of suspension.

T D P Malatjie Malatjie D. Attorneys

REF:38722021
“You are guilty of misconduct in terms of Clauses 21.1 and 21.2 of the Legal Practice Council’s Code of Conduct and / or Rule 57.1 of the Legal Practice Council Rules in that you breached and / or contravened and / or failed to comply with:
1) Rule 54.24.1 read with Rule 54.20, 54.22 and 54.23 of the Rules, in that you failed and / or neglected to TIMEOUSLY furnish to the Legal Practice Council, Mpumalanga Provincial Office, within six months after the annual closing of your books of account, with a Report in its original format in the form of the Eighth Schedule to the Legal Practice Council’s Rules, by your Auditor or Inspector for the period ending 29 February 2020.

3. That you pleaded Guilty to the below charges.

2) Rule 4.1 of the Rules read with Section 6(4)(c) and Section 95(1)(a) of the Legal Practice Act, in that you failed and / or neglected to pay your annual subscription fee(s) for the year(s) 2020 in an amount of R1725.00 to the Legal Practice Council, Mpumalanga Provincial Office as and when it became due and payable; and

3) Rule 4.1 of the Rules read with Section 6(4)(c) and Section 95(1)(a) of the Legal Practice Act, in that you failed and / or neglected to pay your annual subscription fee(s) for the year(s) 2021 in an amount of R1725.00 to the Legal Practice Council, Mpumalanga Provincial Office as and when it became due and payable; and

4) Section 84(1) and Section 84(2) of the Legal Practice Act read with Rule 47 of the Rules by practising for your own account as a Director / Partner of a Practice / Firm of Attorneys under the name and style of Malatjie D. Attorneys without being in possession of a Fidelity Fund Certificate as from 1 January 2021 to date.”

1, Fined R1 000,00 due and payable within 15 days to the Mpumalanga Provincial Council
2, That you have 30 days to comply with charge 4(four), obtain a valid Fidelity Fund Certificate for the year 2021, failure to comply within or by the 30th day from the date of the imposed sanction, the Mpumalanga Provincial Council must approach the Mpumalanga Provincial High Court for a suspension Application in terms of Rule 40,3 on non-compliance.

D Van Wyk Prinsloo (Wynand) & Van Eeden Inc. Attorneys

REF:4452017
‘’ Clause 14 of the Code of Conduct read with Rule 54.14.14 in that you effected payment from Trust Creditor without instructions from your client ‘’the complainant” and effected payment of agent’s commission from the Trust Account before it was due and payable”.

the legal practitioner was found not guilty