Struck-off advocates allege bias by judge

A report in The Mercury says counsel for Theuns Botha and Thilay Pillay, who may no longer practise as advocates, said new facts had come to light to suggest that Van Dijkhorst should have recused himself from the case. They want to place these 'new facts' before the SCA for a ruling on the question of possible bias and as to whether the judge should have sat in judgment of the 13 advocates. The issue was that in November 2009, while the Pretoria Bar was still looking into the allegations against the 13 advocates, Van Dijkhorst made a comment to the effect that those who were involved should be 'nailed'. This remark was made to Advocate Nic Maritz SC, the court was told. Maritz later became the pro forma prosecutor in the Bar Council's disciplinary hearing against the 13. Another point of contention was a comment the judge made to advocate Quintus Pelser SC, when Pelser asked the judge whether the conduct of double briefing and overcharging boiled down to unprofessional conduct. The judge at the time told Pelser that it did indeed and he apparently advised that the Pretoria Bar 'should firmly act against those involved'. Full report in The Mercury (subscription needed)

The two were among six advocates who applied for leave to appeal against the ruling yesterday, notes a report on the News24 site. The names of Advocates Pillay, Botha, Toy de Klerk, Percy Leopeng, Daniel Mogagabe and French Bezuidenhout were struck off in September when three retired judges ordered them to repay the RAF. Seven other advocates, given suspended sentences or suspended for up to six months, were given a year to pay back more than R15.6m to the RAF. The six who were struck off argued yesterday that the SCA might come to a different conclusion. In September, the court heard argument that their conduct of accepting multiple briefs for the same day and then charging a full days' trial fee for each was not dishonest. They contended that everyone, from the judges in the High Court to their attorneys and the RAF, knew about the practice and did not object. Full report on the News24 site

The General Council of the Bar has asked the court for leave to appeal against its decision to suspend rather than strike off the seven other advocates. They are: Brenton Geach SC, Don Williams SC, Stef Güldenpfennig, Mark Upton, Ephraim Seima, Cassie Jordaan and Colin van Onselen. According to a report on the IoL site, the Bar argued that all 13 advocates had been dishonest and that none was fit to practise as an advocate. The application continues. Full report on the IoL site See also a report in The Citizen