A thread 🧵

During 2024, the Legal Practice Council received an anonymous tip-off that its employees in the Risk and Compliance Department in Gauteng were involved in a corrupt scheme with legal practitioners in exchange of money. This scheme included the facilitation of irregular and unlawful falsification of attorneys' audits, and irregular issuing of Certificates of Good Standing and Fidelity Fund Certificates. Disciplinary proceedings were instituted against the employees who were allegedly involved in the scheme. Some of these employees elected to resign in the midst of these proceedings.

I read a judgment over the weekend about a same-sex couple that lived together. The partner passed away and the surviving partner applied to be nominated as the executor of the deceased’s estate. Master of the HC issued a letter of executorship appointing her as the executor of the estate. The deceased’s younger sister also applied to be nominated as executor of the estate and while she was busy collecting documents, she found out that the deceased’s partner had been appointed as executor.
 
She then lodged a complaint with the Master and a meeting was called. Both parties attended the meeting with their legal representatives.

The application was for the return of the minor children to Germany in terms of article 12 of Chapter III of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

It had nothing to do with custody - see article 19 of the Convention: a “decision under this Convention concerning the return of a child shall not be taken to be a determination on the merits of any custody issue” The minor children came with their parents to SA on a 2 month holiday from 7 November 2023 until 11 January 2024. The assumption was that they would go back before the 5 year old daughter returned to school. The husband had booked return flights for all of them. On 11 January 2024, the mother refused to return the minor children to Germany - the father had not consented to the children remaining in SA.

TW//Rape

Just read a crazy judgment on sentencing. Accused 1 (wife) and accused 2 (husband) are married under customary law. In October 2016, accused 2 was charged with the rape of a 19 year old woman. After the rape, the victim’s family assaulted accused 2, took photos of him naked and posted them on Facebook. Accused 2’s family called the police, he was rescued and taken to Groote Schuur Hospital. He was later released from hospital and subsequently detained at Milnerton Police Station for the rape. He thereafter appeared in court and remained in Pollsmoor Correctional Facility pending the hearing of his trial.

Part 1: a thread 🧵

The Legal Practice Council has filed papers for the name of an attorney (let’s call her NN for now) to be struck off the roll of legal practitioners, alternatively, that she be suspended from practicing as a legal practitioner pending the removal of her name from the roll. According to the LPC’s papers, NN was admitted as an attorney in 2020 and started practicing as a sole proprietor.

Interesting. The Thabazimbi Local Municipality and its municipal manager brought a contempt of court application against Absa bank and 2 of its employees for failing to comply with two court orders. The employees: Mankga - a Relationship Executive: Public Sector-RBB Limpopo employed by Absa. She is the person exercising control in respect of the municipality’s bank accounts held at the Thabazimbi Branch of Absa;

Muller - Senior Legal Counsel: Litigation employed by Absa. She is the legal officer who has been dealing with the legal aspects of the disputed access to and control of the municipality’s bank accounts with Absa.

The Minister of Police (read tax payers) has been ordered to pay a couple, Mr and Mrs Langa R420 000 and R490 000 respectively, relating to their unlawful arrest and detention. The incident involved 3 arresting officers, Constable Aphane, Constable Mphahlele and Constable Dibeila.

Mr Langa testified that he was driving and was stopped by the police who were driving a marked police vehicle. They flashed their lights, and he pulled off the road. He explained that his wife warned him to be careful and to make sure the people stopping them were real police officers because the person approaching them was wearing a balaclava.

The comments are interesting.

Employers have the right to discipline and even dismiss employees for misconduct that occurs outside of the workplace. The employer has to establish that it has a legitimate interest in the matter – for example, the misconduct is disruptive to the employer’s business or affects the employer’s reputation. The fact that the misconduct occurred away from the workplace would not necessarily preclude the employer from disciplining its employee. The main principle is to determine the connection between the misconduct and the employer’s business.

There is an interesting case where Discovery Life is seeking to recover R16 million paid out to an accountant under 2 insurance policies which afforded disability and income protection cover in the event that the accountant became totally and permanently unable to perform his nominated occupation as an accountant. In June 2013, the accountant lodged claims under both policies as a result of orthopaedic injuries he suffered when he was knocked over by a car whilst walking. Discovery accepted and paid these claims.

I found this case rather interesting. A thread 🧵

Brief history: Seth Azwihangwisi Nthai was struck off the roll of advocates in April 2013 for attempting to solicit a bribe of R5 million from an Italian businessman.

In 2018, he applied to be re-enrolled as an advocate. As part of his application to be re-enrolled as an advocate, he submitted a founding affidavit to the Limpopo High Court. In this founding affidavit he deposed to facts which, taken together, amounted to admissions that he committed corruption.

“I then told Marcenaro that if the claimants were to pay R5 million into my foreign bank account, I would use my influence to get the Government to agree to settle the matter with each party paying its own costs.”

Employee employed as an Operating Standards Specialist in 2012 and as at January 2020, he was earning a salary of R 83,500 a month.  

November 2018 he applied for a bursary at work in terms of an Extra Mural Study Assistance Programme to further his studies at UCT. The application was approved and 2019 was his first year of studies. Employer agreed to pay the employee’s registration fees, tuition and examination fees.

The initial payment required by UCT to enable the employee to register for the course was R25 500. Employer paid this amount into the employee’s bank account on 4 February 2019.

The Mafube Local Municipality is a participating employer in the Municipal Workers Pension Fund with many of its employees as members of the Fund.

On 9 September 2021, the municipality was ordered to pay the fund R37 795 476.32 - arrear members’ contributions which the municipality had deducted from employees’ salaries but had failed to pay over to the Fund plus interest and costs. The municipality’s bank accounts were attached by the fund, but only R97 000 was available in the account to pay over to the fund.

The Municipality did not dispute that it has deducted pension fund contributions from the salaries of its employees and failed to pay it over to the Fund. However, no explanation was forthcoming about what happened to the money deducted.

An important judgment for all health practitioners.

TW: Rape

2 brothers were convicted in the Paarl Regional Court of the rape of a mentally challenged 17 year old boy. They were each sentenced to life imprisonment. They have an automatic right of appeal.

The minor was examined by a Dr. Mukombe, a locum doctor on duty at the Ceres Hospital on the night of the incident and he completed
the medical examination and report (the J88). At the hearing, Dr. Mukombe was not available to testify - he was no longer based at the Ceres Hospital and had relocated to the rural Eastern Cape. The prosecution had been in contact with him and initially, it appeared that he was unable to attend court because his wife had given birth but had since not been available at all. The prosecutor claimed that he had stopped replying to emails sent to him and the State claimed that it had also been unable to obtain an address in order to serve a subpoena on him. The prosecutor informed the court that she had also sent further e-mails to him requesting certain information, but he had not been forthcoming, and that the State had gone as far as to motivate for an airline ticket for him to travel from the Eastern Cape. She claimed that he had simply not responded at all.

A spoon full of sugar: thread 🧵

Employee employed by Shoprite Checkers (employer) as a baker since 1991 with a clean record of service, was dismissed.

The charge? Consumption of company stock. He was alleged to have, between 17.10.2022 and 22.10.2022:

(1) consumed the employer’s stock, in an undesignated area;

(2) his failure to follow staff buying procedures; and

(3) which caused the employer stock shrinkage. The employer had been experiencing loss of sugar in its bakery and the employee was seen on CCTV stirring sugar into his tea/coffee on company time in an area which was not designated for the consumption of food or drink.

In this case, a Woolworths employee (Ms Maseko) was dismissed for submitting a medical certificate from a doctor (Dr Frempong) suspected of selling medical certificates.

Woolworths had received an email warning them about suspicious medical certificates issued by Dr Frempong. This prompted Woolworths to check her file and discovered that another medical certificate from the same doctor had been issued in March 2016. When she was questioned about those medical certificates, Ms Maseko said that those medical certificates were not from the same doctor. She claimed that the 2016 one was issued by a Dr Zanele and the 2018 one by Dr Frempong.

A thread 🧵

The plaintiff, KMN, is 87 years old. Until late 2013, she lived in Zakariyya Park with her granddaughter Z but Z spent much of her time at boarding school.

During that year, KMN developed a heart condition and started feeling severe but intermittent chest pain. The pain turned out to be the result of fluid build-up in her chest which was itself the result of a tear in one of the blood vessels leading to her heart. She became worried that her condition was serious and feared that she would die alone in her home, with no one to help her seek medical attention or attend to her in her final moments.

She then decided to sell her house in Zakariyya Park, and move in with one of her granddaughters (NCZ) and her husband (MZ) - 1st and 2nd defendant. NCZ and MZ bought a large house in Kibler Park so as to accommodate KMN, L and Z (grandchildren) together with their own family.

Please make your parents aware of these scams.

A 67 year old pensioner was scammed by fraudsters who got control over her bank account and paid R960 960.19 in 23 different transactions on the same day into bank accounts of the third respondent (Rowen Petrus) at Capitec Bank and Absa Bank. Capitec and Absa placed a precautionary hold on Rowen’s accounts but this was not going to be indefinitely unless they were provided with a court order extending the hold. If she failed to do so, they would release the hold on the accounts and Rowen would be able to continue transacting on his bank accounts.

Ms Zondi is currently serving pupillage but the Legal Practice Council has declined to certify that she is a fit and proper person to be admitted as an advocate. She was debarred by Aon SA under s14 (1) of the FAIS Act from rendering financial services to which the Act applies.

Ms Zondi applied for the review and setting aside of Aon’s decision. Ms Zondi was employed by Aon on 1 April 2015 as a short-term insurance salesperson. In May 2016, she was charged with dishonestly claiming commission on fictitious sales of short-term insurance products to customers, some of whom turned out not to exist. She was also accused of claiming commission on genuine sales that was in fact due to other salespeople employed by Aon.

Interesting case…a thread 🧵

December 2023: LexisNexis (employer) advertised a position for a Senior Data Discovery and Enrichment Expert I. Applicant applied, went through the interview process and on 20 January 2024, he was notified via email by a Ms Singh that his interview had been positive, and that they required further information from him to continue processing the application.

This information included filling out a “RefCheck Consent and Indemnity Form”. When filling out the above-mentioned form, the applicant responded “yes” when asked if he had ever been criminally charged. In response to the section “If yes, details of charge / conviction”, he filled out the available space by saying “For theft in 2001 which has been expunged…”

On 27 January 2024, the applicant provided his fingerprints at a local PostNet for the employer to conduct a criminal background check.

In July 2013, Mr Ncube took out a life insurance policy with Liberty Group Limited. In terms of the policy, Liberty undertook to provide death benefit cover of R11 245 725.00 after the policy anniversary date subject to a premium contribution of R2 034.24 in respect of the life assured, Mr Mhlanzi. The policy anniversary date was 1 August 2017, in terms of which the premium amount would increase as per the agreement.

Defamation: Native Child Africa v Mary Oluwatobiloba Akinwale. This case serves as a reminder to social media influencers/brand ambassadors to read and understand the terms of their contracts and the legal consequences thereof.

A student and social media influencer)with over 108,000 social media followers across Instagram, TikTok and X began publishing a series of defamatory statements and videos against Native Child Africa, founded and run by Sonto Pooe. Ms Akinwale accused Native Child of exploitation and unethical business practices. It was alleged that she called on her followers to harass Native Child on its various social media pages, encouraged them to repost her defamatory posts, and told them to go to Native Child’s major retail clients to tell them to stop selling their products.