De Rebus

The legal profession has often had to adapt to change; however, the pace of change today can feel very rapid. The accelerated evolution of technology, driven by artificial intelligence (AI), evolving workplace practices, emerging sophisticated cyber threats, and shifting constitutional and regulatory frameworks continue to impact the environment in which legal practitioners operate.

PO Box 36626, Menlo Park 0102 Docex 82, Pretoria E-mail: derebus@derebus.org.za Fax (012) 362 0969 Letters are not published under noms de plume. However, letters from practising attorneys who make their identities and addresses known to the editor may be considered for publication anonymously. Section 174: No ‘second leg’ in the constitutional era I wrote an article ‘At first sight’ to clarify the law regarding s 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977.

Committee Members of the Free State Legal Practitioners Provincial Association with Law Society of South Africa Vice President, Nkosana Mvundlela, at the official launch of the association in Bloemfontein on 22 May 2026. The Free State Legal Practitioners Provincial Association was officially launch on 22 May 2026.

Law Society of South Africa (LSSA) President, Mr Machini Motloung, officially welcomes Ms Charlene Louw as the new Executive Director of the LSSA. The President of the Law Society of South Africa (LSSA), Mr Machini Motloung, together with the House of Constituents (HOC), is pleased to announce and welcome the appointment of Ms Charlene Louw as the new Executive Director of the Law Society of South Africa. Ms Louw assumed her duties on 1 June 2026.

De Rebus proudly displays the “FAIR” stamp of the Press Council of South Africa, indicating our commitment to adhere to the Code of Ethics for Print and online media, which prescribes that our reportage is truthful, accurate and fair. Should you wish to lodge a complaint about our news coverage, please lodge a complaint on the Press Council’s website at www.presscouncil.org.za or e-mail the complaint to enquiries@ombudsman.org.za. Contact the Press Council at (011) 4843612.

South African Property Owners’ Association v City of Cape Town (WCC) (unreported case no 103018/2025; 139023/2023, 30-4-2026) (Mabindla-Boqwana JP and Le Grange and Savage JJ) By Jacques Nieuwoudt Material facts and significance The case of South African Property Owners’ Association v City of Cape Town (WCC) (unreported case no 103018/2025; 139023/2023, 30-4-2026) (Mabindla-Boqwana JP and Le Grange and Savage JJ) is a significant judgment on the limits of municipal revenue-raising powers.

Picture source: Getty/iStock English philosopher Julien Baggini once stated that ‘[he] maintain[s] the importance of an absolute prohibition against torture, while acknowledging that even absolute prohibitions can sometimes be broken. If that is a contradiction, it is a contradiction that ethics has to embrace, or else it becomes like glass: Hard, clear, but fatally inflexible’ (https://quotefancy.com, accessed 4-6-2026).

Peer review is one of the best practices commonly used in many professions to promote and uphold best standards. It ensures that quality is monitored and maintained throughout the industry. Peer review is simply defined as the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work (Wikipedia ‘Peer review’ (https://en.wikipedia.org, accessed 2-6-2026)).

S v Thabethe and Others [2025] 3 All SA 333 (SCA) This note argues that the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) in S v Thabethe and Others [2025] 3 All SA 333 (SCA), correctly characterised the High Court’s approach as a misdirection of law, thereby reinforcing that the application of the doctrine of common purpose is not merely factual but involves a legal standard and scrutiny in South African criminal law.

In applications brought under s 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977, courts are frequently confronted with discrepancies between a complainant’s prior statement to the police and their viva voce evidence in court. A recurring feature in such proceedings is that defence counsel place significant reliance on these inconsistencies, often arguing that substantial deviations between the two versions render the State’s case so unreliable that a discharge ought to follow.