UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA
College of Law – Department of Jurisprudence
⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄⋄
LJU4802: Professional Ethics
Assignment 01 | 2026
⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄⋄
LJU4802
Module Code:
Professional Ethics
Module Name:
Fit and proper persons; Fidelity Fund cer-
Essay Topic:
tificates
Assignment 01
Assignment Number:
28 August 2026
Due Date:
2 2026
Semester:
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements
for Professional Ethics (LJU4802), UNISA 2026
, UNISA | LJU4802 Professional Ethics: Assignment 01
Question 1: The Three-Stage Enquiry into Fitness to Practise
Section 22(1)(d) of the Attorneys Act 53 of 1979 empowered a court to strike an attorney off
the roll, or suspend the attorney from practice, where that attorney was “in the discretion of
the court, not a fit and proper person to continue to practise as an attorney”.1 The Supreme
Court of Appeal in Jasat v Natal Law Society was asked to determine what this discretion
actually involves, and in doing so set out a structured, three-staged enquiry that continues to
guide the fit-and-proper-person test under the current legal profession framework.2 The court
explained that earlier authority had treated the section as involving only a twofold enquiry, but
held that a preliminary factual question logically precedes those two enquiries, so that the
section, properly understood, contemplates three distinct stages.3
1.1 The First Stage: The Factual Enquiry
The court must first decide whether the misconduct alleged against the attorney has actually
been established, on a preponderance of probabilities.4 This is a straightforward, factual en-
quiry, no different in kind from a finding of fact in any other civil matter, and it carries none of
the value-laden or discretionary character of the two stages that follow it.5 Nothing about the
attorney’s character or fitness is decided at this point; the court is simply asking whether, on
the evidence before it, the conduct complained of did in fact occur. Only once the offending
conduct is established on the probabilities does the enquiry move beyond mere fact-finding.
1.2 The Second Stage: The Discretionary Value Judgment
If the conduct is established, the court must then decide, in its discretion, whether the at-
torney is not a fit and proper person to continue practising.6 This stage is not mechanical.
It involves weighing the conduct actually complained of against the standard of conduct
expected of an attorney, which the court described as amounting, in substance, to a value
judgment rather than a simple factual determination.7 Because this stage rests on the dis-
cretion of the court of first instance, a court of appeal has only a limited power to interfere
1
Attorneys Act 53 of 1979, s 22(1)(d).
2
Professional Ethics (LJU4802) Learning Units (Department of Jurisprudence, Unisa, 2026), Learning Unit 3,
Heading: The Fit and Proper Person Requirement.
3
Jasat v Natal Law Society 2000 (3) SA 44 (SCA) 51C–E.
4
Jasat (n 3) 51E.
5
ibid.
6
ibid 51F.
7
Jasat (n 3) 51G.
Page 2 of 9
College of Law – Department of Jurisprudence
⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄⋄
LJU4802: Professional Ethics
Assignment 01 | 2026
⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄⋄
LJU4802
Module Code:
Professional Ethics
Module Name:
Fit and proper persons; Fidelity Fund cer-
Essay Topic:
tificates
Assignment 01
Assignment Number:
28 August 2026
Due Date:
2 2026
Semester:
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements
for Professional Ethics (LJU4802), UNISA 2026
, UNISA | LJU4802 Professional Ethics: Assignment 01
Question 1: The Three-Stage Enquiry into Fitness to Practise
Section 22(1)(d) of the Attorneys Act 53 of 1979 empowered a court to strike an attorney off
the roll, or suspend the attorney from practice, where that attorney was “in the discretion of
the court, not a fit and proper person to continue to practise as an attorney”.1 The Supreme
Court of Appeal in Jasat v Natal Law Society was asked to determine what this discretion
actually involves, and in doing so set out a structured, three-staged enquiry that continues to
guide the fit-and-proper-person test under the current legal profession framework.2 The court
explained that earlier authority had treated the section as involving only a twofold enquiry, but
held that a preliminary factual question logically precedes those two enquiries, so that the
section, properly understood, contemplates three distinct stages.3
1.1 The First Stage: The Factual Enquiry
The court must first decide whether the misconduct alleged against the attorney has actually
been established, on a preponderance of probabilities.4 This is a straightforward, factual en-
quiry, no different in kind from a finding of fact in any other civil matter, and it carries none of
the value-laden or discretionary character of the two stages that follow it.5 Nothing about the
attorney’s character or fitness is decided at this point; the court is simply asking whether, on
the evidence before it, the conduct complained of did in fact occur. Only once the offending
conduct is established on the probabilities does the enquiry move beyond mere fact-finding.
1.2 The Second Stage: The Discretionary Value Judgment
If the conduct is established, the court must then decide, in its discretion, whether the at-
torney is not a fit and proper person to continue practising.6 This stage is not mechanical.
It involves weighing the conduct actually complained of against the standard of conduct
expected of an attorney, which the court described as amounting, in substance, to a value
judgment rather than a simple factual determination.7 Because this stage rests on the dis-
cretion of the court of first instance, a court of appeal has only a limited power to interfere
1
Attorneys Act 53 of 1979, s 22(1)(d).
2
Professional Ethics (LJU4802) Learning Units (Department of Jurisprudence, Unisa, 2026), Learning Unit 3,
Heading: The Fit and Proper Person Requirement.
3
Jasat v Natal Law Society 2000 (3) SA 44 (SCA) 51C–E.
4
Jasat (n 3) 51E.
5
ibid.
6
ibid 51F.
7
Jasat (n 3) 51G.
Page 2 of 9
