,LJU4802 EXAM PORTFOLIO SEMESTER 2 2025
DUE DATE: 24 OCTOBER 2025
QUESTION 1: THE LEGAL PROFESSION
1.1 Discussion of Sipho’s Statement with Reference to the Legal Practice Act 28
of 2014
Sipho’s statement that his conduct as a legal professional will only be regulated once
he has been admitted as an attorney is legally incorrect. The Legal Practice Act 28
of 2014 (“LPA”) establishes a comprehensive regulatory framework that governs not
only admitted legal practitioners but also candidate legal practitioners (including
those undergoing vocational training). According to section 1 of the LPA, a candidate
legal practitioner is defined as a person undergoing practical vocational training with
the intention of being admitted as either an attorney or advocate. Therefore, such
persons fall within the scope of regulation by the Legal Practice Council (LPC) and
are subject to professional and ethical standards from the commencement of their
training period (Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014, s 1).
The Legal Practice Council (established under section 4) has the statutory mandate
to regulate all legal practitioners, candidate attorneys, and pupils in the interest of
maintaining professional integrity, competence, and accountability in the legal
profession. This means Sipho’s conduct during his vocational training is already
subject to professional regulation. For instance, section 36(1) of the LPA provides
that no person may practise as a legal practitioner or perform any act pertaining to the
profession unless they are duly admitted and enrolled. However, section 37(5)
clarifies that candidate legal practitioners are permitted to perform certain acts under
the supervision of a practising attorney or advocate. The act further implies that such
supervised practice must conform to ethical and professional standards enforced by
the LPC. Thus, while Sipho is not yet an admitted attorney, his professional behaviour
remains under the scrutiny of the regulatory body (Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014, s
36–37).
, Moreover, the Code of Conduct for Legal Practitioners, Candidate Legal
Practitioners and Juristic Entities—promulgated under section 36(2) of the LPA—
explicitly applies to candidate legal practitioners. The Code outlines duties such as
honesty, confidentiality, respect for the court, and avoidance of conduct that brings the
legal profession into disrepute. Therefore, any unethical or unprofessional behaviour
by Sipho during his training could result in disciplinary proceedings under the authority
of the LPC, even before his formal admission. In terms of section 55(1)(a), the LPC
has the power to investigate complaints of misconduct against both legal practitioners
and candidate legal practitioners. This provision reinforces the idea that the
professional regulation of conduct begins at the point of vocational training, not
post-admission (Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014, s 55).
Furthermore, section 119 of the LPA gives transitional effect to the application of
ethical rules and ensures continuity from the previous Attorneys Act 53 of 1979, which
similarly held that candidate attorneys were subject to disciplinary control. The policy
rationale behind this regulatory framework is to instil ethical consciousness early
in a practitioner’s career, thereby ensuring that the integrity of the profession is
upheld from the onset of training. The regulation of candidate practitioners safeguards
public confidence in the legal system and prevents misconduct by individuals who are
still learning the profession but already engage with clients, courts, and confidential
information (De la Harpe, 2019).
In conclusion, Sipho’s belief that his conduct will only be regulated after admission is
misguided. The Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014 and the Code of Conduct make it
clear that professional and ethical regulation begins during vocational training.
Candidate legal practitioners are bound by the same foundational ethical duties as
admitted attorneys, including honesty, integrity, competence, and confidentiality.
Therefore, Sipho’s current actions and conduct are indeed regulated by law, and any
breach of professional ethics could jeopardise his future admission to practice.
QUESTION 2:
PHILOSOPHICAL APPROACHES TO ETHICS
DUE DATE: 24 OCTOBER 2025
QUESTION 1: THE LEGAL PROFESSION
1.1 Discussion of Sipho’s Statement with Reference to the Legal Practice Act 28
of 2014
Sipho’s statement that his conduct as a legal professional will only be regulated once
he has been admitted as an attorney is legally incorrect. The Legal Practice Act 28
of 2014 (“LPA”) establishes a comprehensive regulatory framework that governs not
only admitted legal practitioners but also candidate legal practitioners (including
those undergoing vocational training). According to section 1 of the LPA, a candidate
legal practitioner is defined as a person undergoing practical vocational training with
the intention of being admitted as either an attorney or advocate. Therefore, such
persons fall within the scope of regulation by the Legal Practice Council (LPC) and
are subject to professional and ethical standards from the commencement of their
training period (Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014, s 1).
The Legal Practice Council (established under section 4) has the statutory mandate
to regulate all legal practitioners, candidate attorneys, and pupils in the interest of
maintaining professional integrity, competence, and accountability in the legal
profession. This means Sipho’s conduct during his vocational training is already
subject to professional regulation. For instance, section 36(1) of the LPA provides
that no person may practise as a legal practitioner or perform any act pertaining to the
profession unless they are duly admitted and enrolled. However, section 37(5)
clarifies that candidate legal practitioners are permitted to perform certain acts under
the supervision of a practising attorney or advocate. The act further implies that such
supervised practice must conform to ethical and professional standards enforced by
the LPC. Thus, while Sipho is not yet an admitted attorney, his professional behaviour
remains under the scrutiny of the regulatory body (Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014, s
36–37).
, Moreover, the Code of Conduct for Legal Practitioners, Candidate Legal
Practitioners and Juristic Entities—promulgated under section 36(2) of the LPA—
explicitly applies to candidate legal practitioners. The Code outlines duties such as
honesty, confidentiality, respect for the court, and avoidance of conduct that brings the
legal profession into disrepute. Therefore, any unethical or unprofessional behaviour
by Sipho during his training could result in disciplinary proceedings under the authority
of the LPC, even before his formal admission. In terms of section 55(1)(a), the LPC
has the power to investigate complaints of misconduct against both legal practitioners
and candidate legal practitioners. This provision reinforces the idea that the
professional regulation of conduct begins at the point of vocational training, not
post-admission (Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014, s 55).
Furthermore, section 119 of the LPA gives transitional effect to the application of
ethical rules and ensures continuity from the previous Attorneys Act 53 of 1979, which
similarly held that candidate attorneys were subject to disciplinary control. The policy
rationale behind this regulatory framework is to instil ethical consciousness early
in a practitioner’s career, thereby ensuring that the integrity of the profession is
upheld from the onset of training. The regulation of candidate practitioners safeguards
public confidence in the legal system and prevents misconduct by individuals who are
still learning the profession but already engage with clients, courts, and confidential
information (De la Harpe, 2019).
In conclusion, Sipho’s belief that his conduct will only be regulated after admission is
misguided. The Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014 and the Code of Conduct make it
clear that professional and ethical regulation begins during vocational training.
Candidate legal practitioners are bound by the same foundational ethical duties as
admitted attorneys, including honesty, integrity, competence, and confidentiality.
Therefore, Sipho’s current actions and conduct are indeed regulated by law, and any
breach of professional ethics could jeopardise his future admission to practice.
QUESTION 2:
PHILOSOPHICAL APPROACHES TO ETHICS
