Peet Viljoen Wins Landmark Supreme Court of Appeal Case Against the Law Society
South African celebrity lawyer Peet Viljoen made legal history when he won a landmark case in the Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa (SCA). The case, Law Society of the Northern Provinces v Viljoen [2010] ZASCA 176, confirmed that only the courts — not the Law Society — have the power to decide whether an attorney is “fit and proper” to practice.
This decision not only protected Viljoen’s right to practice law, but also set a binding precedent that continues to influence South African case law today.
⸻
The Background: Law Society vs Peet Viljoen
The Law Society of the Northern Provinces attempted to deny Peet Viljoen his fidelity fund certificate, a requirement for every South African attorney. Their argument was that he was not a fit and proper person to remain in practice.
Viljoen challenged this, arguing that the law society was overstepping its authority, because only a court of law can make such a determination.
⸻
The Core Legal Question
The central issue was:
Does the Law Society have the power to decide whether a lawyer is “fit and proper,” or is that power reserved for the courts?
The case reached the Supreme Court of Appeal in Bloemfontein, heard by a panel of five senior judges: Brand, Maya, Malan JJA, Bosielo and Seriti AJJA.
⸻
The Judgment: Victory for Peet Viljoen
The Supreme Court of Appeal ruled firmly in Viljoen’s favor:
• Courts Decide, Not the Law Society
“The question whether a practitioner is a fit and proper person to continue practising is one reserved for the courts, not the law society.” – SCA Judgment, para 3
• Law Society Overstepped Its Powers
The Law Society’s refusal to issue the fidelity fund certificate was unlawful.
• Rare Costs Order Against the Law Society
“The court a quo ordered the society to pay the costs of the application. Such an order is unusual but justified in the circumstances of this case.” – SCA Judgment, para 7
This was highly unusual. In South Africa, it is extremely rare for courts to order the Law Society to pay costs.
• Appeal Dismissed
The Supreme Court dismissed the Law Society’s appeal with costs, confirming the High Court’s ruling in Viljoen’s favor.
⸻
Why This Case Matters
This case became a landmark precedent in South African jurisprudence:
• It clarified that professional bodies like law societies cannot usurp judicial authority.
• It safeguarded attorneys from administrative overreach.
• It highlighted Peet Viljoen’s role in shaping professional conduct law in South Africa