SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document
in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
CASE NO: 23339/2022
(1) REPORTABLE: NO
(2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO
(3) REVISED: NO
DATE 3/9/2025
SIGNATURE
In the matter between:
P[...] M[...] O.B.O. MINOR
M[...] D[...] M[...]
Plaintiff
and
THE MEC FOR HEALTH, GAUTENG Defendant
This judgment was handed down electronically by circulation to the parties’
representatives via e -mail, by being uploaded to CaseLines /Court online and by
release to SAFLII. The date and time for hand - down is deemed to be 1 0h00 on
____ September 2025.
JUDGMENT (APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL)
TODD, AJ:
[1] On 21 August 2025, th is matter was enrolled for the hearing of an application
for leave to appeal against the order that I made on 12 June 2024 . I gave
reasons for that order in a judgment handed down on 12 July 2024.
[2] At the hearing on 21 August 2025, there was no appearance for the Applicant,
whose attorney had sent an email with a medical certificate indicating that he
was indisposed.
[3] On that date I made an order postponing the matter , with directions to the
parties to deliver written submissions in the application.
[4] The Respondent duly delivered written submissions, but the Applicant declined
to do so.
[5] I have considered the papers filed of record in the application for leave to
appeal.
[6] The order which the Applicant seeks to appeal was an order striking the matter
from the roll , awarding costs to be paid by the Applicant’s attorney de bonis
propriis, and ordering that the Applicant’s attorney was precluded from charging
any fees relating to the bringing of the urgent application.
[7] Reasons for that order were set out in the written judgment handed down on 12
July 2024.
[8] I have considered all the papers in the application and the written submissions
of the Respondent . In my view the Applicant has no reasonable prospects of
success on appeal, and it would not be in the interest s of justice to grant leave
to appeal.
[9] The Applicant’s legal representative, Mr Malatji, has persisted in the course of
prosecuting the appeal with conduct completely inappropriate for a legal
practitioner. He has, in my view, shown himself not to be a fit and proper
person to conduct the practice of law. He has persisted with egregious
personal attacks against judges , including me, despite my having issued prior
cautions to him in this regard – in paragraphs [42] to [45] of the judgment
handed down on 12 July 2024.
[10] I direct the Registrar to send a copy of this judgment to the Legal Practice
Council together with the judgment of 12 July 2024.
[11] Regarding costs, in my view these should again be paid by the attorney Mr
Malatji de bonis propriis, for the same reasons as those set out in the judgment
of 12 July 2024. I do not think that the costs of two counsel were warranted in
this application for leave to appeal.
[12] In the circumstances , the application for leave to appeal is dismissed with
costs, including the costs of one Counsel, with the costs to be paid by the
Applicant’s attorney de bonis propriis.
C TODD
ACTING JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
JOHANNESBURG
Date of Hearing: 21 August 2025
Date of Judgment: 3 September 2025
APPEARANCES
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Malatji (attorney)
Instructed by: Malatji S legal Practitioners
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr M W Dlamini SC
with him, Ms L Rakgwale
Instructed by: Motsoeneng Bill Attorneys Inc