Jasat v Natal Law Society

The appellant, Farouk Jasat, was a practising attorney in Pietermaritzburg. He was convicted in criminal proceedings arising from a break-in at the offices of another attorney who had fled the country. During his criminal trial, Jasat raised a false alibi defence, knowingly gave perjured evidence, and called a witness to corroborate his false version. After his conviction, the Natal Law Society instituted proceedings to have him struck off the roll of attorneys. In the striking-off application, Jasat admitted for the first time that he had lied under oath and had suborned another witness to do the same, but contended that despite this conduct he remained a fit and proper person to practise.

The appeal was dismissed with costs. The order striking the appellant from the roll of attorneys was confirmed. The respondent’s petition to supplement the record with the criminal trial transcript was upheld with costs.

This case is a leading authority on professional discipline in South African law, particularly regarding dishonesty by legal practitioners. It affirms that sustained perjury and subornation of perjury strike at the heart of the integrity required of attorneys and will ordinarily justify striking-off rather than suspension. The judgment also restates the three-stage inquiry applicable to disciplinary proceedings and clarifies the limited scope of appellate interference with such discretionary decisions.