Fine v Society of Advocates of South Africa (Witwatersrand Division)

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Judge: Rabie CJ, Cillié JA, Viljoen JA, Botha JA and James AJA
• Judgment Date: 27 May 1983
• Citation: 1983 (4) SA 488 (A)
• Hearing Date: 19 May 1983
• Court: Appellate Division

James AJA:

This is an appeal from an order of the Transvaal Provincial Division striking the name of the appellant from the roll of advocates. I shall refer to the appellant by his name H henceforth in this judgment.

Fine was admitted as an advocate in 1974 and was a member of the respondent society until September 1979 when he resigned as a member but continued to practise as an advocate, doing pro Deo defences for the most part.

Fine's estate was sequestrated early in September 1979 and, as a result of facts that then came to light, the Bar Council conducted an

James AJA

inquiry into his conduct, and thereafter decided to make an application to Court for his removal from the roll of advocates.

The information which the Society relied upon in its application to Court was contained in Fine's written statement A to the Society. This statement is well summarized in the judgment of NICHOLAS J in the Court a quo in the following passage:

"During 1979 Fine travelled to Europe together with his father, a Johannesburg attorney. Fine himself was en route to Israel. In Antwerp he and his father met clients of the father, who were a man named Wawrzyniak and his partner. They consulted B Fine's father in connection with the operation of a certain gaming table which they wished to introduce in Johannesburg. Fine's father informed the partners that, notwithstanding the opinion of a professor and certain judgments which were shown to him, there was no prospect of their being permitted to operate such table in Johannesburg. Fine then suggested that there was a possibility of operating either in Swaziland or in Bophuthatswana. Wawrzyniak and his C partner were interested and suggested that Fine should accompany them to these territories. They said that they would reimburse him with the costs of his flight to Israel, that they would pay all his hotel expenses and that they would make it worth his while as they were prepared to pay to him in addition a substantial sum in cash. After consideration Fine agreed. He was given a refund of his airfare to Israel and his hotel expenses in Antwerp were paid and he was given a substantial D sum of money, the amount of which he does not however disclose.

Fine and one of the partners came to South Africa. On their arrival Fine made arrangements for the partner accompanying him to meet certain officials in Bophuthatswana. He said in his statement that he was not doing any legal business; all that he had to do was to introduce the person who had accompanied him to officials in Bophuthatswana. After they returned from Bophuthatswana the partner from Antwerp left.

E The other partner, Wawrzyniak, arrived in Johannesburg shortly afterwards. He booked in at the Carlton Hotel from where he contacted Fine. While Wawrzyniak was in Johannesburg Fine met him frequently. They had meals together and they became very friendly. On 12 March 1979, when Fine dined with Wawrzyniak, the latter informed him that he was busy negotiating the lease for premises in Hillbrow and that he F would have to deposit an amount sufficient to cover the initial period of six months which would amount to just under R10 000. Wawrzyniak informed Fine that he had not the available finance with him but that this money would be sent by him from Antwerp and that as he trusted Fine he would prefer to forward the money to him and that Fine should pay out the monthly rental for him. Wawrzyniak further informed Fine that he was G engaging a certain Mr Reyneke to effect interior decoration in the premises and that he would also forward to Fine moneys to be paid to Reyneke. Fine suggested that the lessor's representative, a Mr Dritz, an attorney who was not in practice, should call at Fine's chambers to sign the lease after 5 pm on 13 March.

On that day Fine was in court but late in the afternoon he returned to his chambers where Dritz arrived and told him that H the lessee, that is, Wawrzyniak, had had to leave that morning urgently...