ConCourt fed up with fraudster advocate

The Constitutional Court has ordered the Pretoria Society of Advocates to stop self-confessed fraudster, Advocate Ralph Ndleve, from practising law.

Johannesburg - Self-confessed fraudster, Advocate Ralph Ndleve, has spent three years trying to fight being struck off the roll of advocates for his malpractice and theft, even going so far as to approach the Constitutional Court five times.

But on Thursday, the apex court had had enough, dismissing his application to appeal yet again and ordering the Pretoria Society of Advocates (PSOA) to stop him from practising law altogether.

In 2013, Ndleve was struck off the roll of advocates after it was found that even before he was admitted as an advocate in 2002, from 2000 until 2008, he took instructions from numerous people without the intervention of an attorney, stole the money meant for their creditors and even took more than R70 000 from the estate of a late client.

Between 2006 and 2013, however, the PSOA received at least six complains against him, and were successful in having Ndleve struck off the roll after he admitted under oath to having stolen from his clients.

Reading out the Constitutional Court's unanimous judgment on Thursday morning, Acting Deputy Chief Justice Baaitse Nkabinde said the court was disturbed to find out Ndleve was still acting as an advocate four months after he was struck off the roll.

In an entirely unrelated application lodged in 2015, Ndleve's name was still attached as counsel during the proceedings in the lower courts. Justice Nkabinde said that it was clear that by appealing to the apex court five times, he was “peppering (the) court with repeated applications, each entirely devoid of merit, simply to stave off the coming into effect of the order striking him from the roll of advocates”.

However, Justice Nkabinde clarified that this was not an effective strategy, and that all of his appearances as an advocate since July 2013 were unlawful, and bordered on contempt of court.

“It is especially troubling since the purpose of (the striking order) is not simply punishment. It is rather 'protection of the public',” she said, adding it was now time for the PSOA to take appropriate steps at the High Court to stop Ndleve's “unavailing stream of litigation”.

“The society owes that duty to the court, and to the public,” the judgment read.

However, attempts to contact PSOA chairperson, Advocate Norman Davis, to determine how this would be done were on Thursday unsuccessful.

Meanwhile, Ndleve believes the court's ruling is merely a “minor setback”. In a statement to The Star, he said: “The CC (Constitutional Court) has inherent jurisdiction to reconsider its judgment and surely I will consider my options to bring the matter back to them within the next five days of receipt of said judgment… I therefore reserve further comments in this regard until I have so weighed my options.”

shain.germaner@inl.co.za

The Star