REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA

		CASE NO:38406/2020
DOH: 21 FEBRUARY 2022

1.	REPORTABLE: NO / YES
2.	OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO / YES
3.	REVISED. 

…………..………….............	……………………
 SIGNATURE			DATE

	

In the matter of:

DALE IRENE	 Applicant	
		
and		
		
RIAAN DU PLESSIS ATTORNEYS & CONVEYANCERS	First Respondent	
JOHANNES CHRISTIAN DU PLESSIS	Second Respondent	
P J KLEYNHANS INCORPORATED    ATTORNEYS 	Third Respondent	
LEGAL PRACTICE COUNCIL 	Fourth Respondent 	

—————————————————————————————————————-

				JUDGMENT
THIS JUDGMENT HAS BEEN HANDED DOWN REMOTELY AND SHALL BE CIRCULATED TO THE PARTIES BY WAY OF EMAIL. ITS DATE AND TIME OF HAND DOWN SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE 2022/02/28
———————————————————————————————————

A. Introduction 

1.	This matter was heard on 21 February 2022. 
2.	The second respondent practices as a sole practitioner. Thus, notwithstanding the citation of the first and second respondents, they are essentially the same person. The third and fourth respondents are not participating in this matter. For that reason, I use respondent when referring to the first and second respondents.
3.	The applicant, as the party that is dominus litis, bears the responsibility to ensure that her papers are in order.
4.	Rule 63 of the Uniform Rules is applicable. Ex facie the papers, Rule 63 has not been complied with. Thus, there is no application before court. On that basis, the ‘application’ cannot succeed. 

B. Order 
5.	In the circumstances, I make the following order:
(i)	The application is dismissed.
(ii)	The applicant must pay the first and second respnodents’ costs. 

—————————————————
NN BAM
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT, PRETORIA 

Appearances: 
Counsel for the applicants: 		Adv Mureriwa				
Instructed by:				Makota Attorneys

For the respondents 			Adv Grobler SC
Instructed by:				JC Du Plessis Attorneys
						℅ Jansen and Jansen