Assignment

Somila Msutu
Full Name & Surname

u19039485
Student Number

Module code RPK210

Introduction

Professional ethics are a set of principles that regulate the legal profession. They provide a
framework of norms and standards that dictate the proper conduct to which a practitioner
must conform in their day-to-day practice of the law. In the legal profession, the proper
conduct that is provided for within these professional ethics upon which legal practitioners
are judged, can be referred to as being “fit and proper”. A legal practitioner who is fit and
proper upholds the law, is honest, displays behavior within their personal life that does not
bring disrepute to the profession, and places the law and the interests of justice first. The
scenario provided concerns Mr. Bob Mabunda, a director of a large corporate law firm, and
his actions regarding his adherence to the professional ethics and responsibilities of the
legal profession. In this essay, I will examine the conduct of Mr. Mabunda and determine
whether he has violated any standards of professional ethics and responsibilities. If he is in
breach of these standards, I will provide reasons as to why, thus deeming him not fit and
proper to practice as an attorney.

Body

Overcharging Clients and Encouragement of Unethical Behavior

Emma Grace, Mr. Mabunda’s assistant (PA), finds herself morally conflicted due to the high
pressure placed on her to meet the firm’s target fees within the law firm. When Emma
approaches Mr. Mabunda about this moral conflict, he wrongly encourages her to inflate the
billable hours of her clients to help meet her weekly fee targets. This practice is known as
“padding the bill”. Padding bills violate the ethical principle of integrity as it involves
intentionally overcharging clients and misrepresenting the value of services provided. The
legal profession demands honesty, reliability, and integrity from its practitioners1. Bill padding
is not consistent with the responsibility of legal practitioners in ensuring that clients are billed
fairly, accurately, and in line with section 352. Mr. Mabunda justifies this questionable practice
by mentioning that it is an industry custom and that wealthy clients can afford it. This only
alludes to an exploitation of clients based on their financial standing which is in clear
violation of professional standards as practitioners have a responsibility to reasonably
charge clients based on the value of legal services delivered. In encouraging his PA to inflate
her clients’ bills, Mr. Mabunda, being one of the firm’s senior members, perpetuates a culture
of unethical behavior that may damage the firm’s credibility which will result in a loss of
future clients. This unprofessional conduct of overcharging clients and high level of

1
Vassen v Law Society of the Cape 1998(4) 532 (SCA)
2
Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014
dishonesty may be detrimental to him like it was to the attorney in Mtshabe3 who suffered
severe consequences for the same conduct. It will also be detrimental to the reputation and
public confidence of the legal profession as a whole. Mr. Mabunda’s actions, which include
encouraging unethical behavior and questionable billing practices, clearly violate
professional standards of ethics and responsibility. Additionally, an attorney’s conduct that
lacks integrity is deemed to be an attorney unfit and improper to practice.

Conflict of Interest and Professional Negligence

Mr. Mabunda’s advice to his client Mr.Sly, to personally lend him money for an investment
into his struggling construction company, shows a violation of professional ethics and
responsibility and exemplifies a clear conflict of interest. In an attorney-client relationship, an
attorney has the professional responsibility to act in their client’s best interests and avoid a
conflict of interest. Mr. Mabunda placed his interests over those of his client by prioritizing his
own financial gain from the transaction to salvage his failing construction company from
bankruptcy. This exhibits a conflict of interest and a departure from the standards of
professional ethics and responsibility as he failed his duty to advance the interests of his
client. Since Mr. Mabunda has conducted investments on behalf of Mr.Sly over the years.
Mr.Mabunda exploited and undermined the trust within their attorney-client relationship for
his financial gain. As an attorney, you are required to practice with the utmost integrity,
loyalty and avoid any conduct that could undermine the trust between you and your client. In
this case, Mr.Mabunda acted unethically by diminishing the professional integrity of his
attorney-client relationship with Mr.Sly. In his breach of duty to advance the interests of his
client, Mr. Mabunda failed to exercise proper due diligence in evaluating the poor financial
health and viability of his construction company as a competent investment for his client. The
subsequent bankruptcy of the construction company meant the loss of his client's funds
which constitutes professional negligence. It is the responsibility of the attorney to exercise
the knowledge, skill, and diligence expected of an average practising attorney that will
service clients effectively. It requires the attorney to provide competent legal advice to their
client based on a reasonable assessment of the risks and the facts. By prioritizing his
interests over those of the client, Mr. Mabunda’s advice exposed Mr.Sly’s investment to
undue risk. Mr. Mabunda’s conflicting interests, failure to maintain the integrity of his
attorney-client relationship, along with his professional negligence is a violation of standards
of professional ethics and responsibilities, thus casting doubt on his ability to be a fit and
proper attorney.

3
Mtshabe vs Law Society of the Cape of Good Hope 2014 (5) SA 376 (ECM)
The Representation of Belinda Sly

The acceptance by Mr. Mabunda to represent Belinda Sly, spouse of his former client Mr.Joe
Sly in divorce proceedings is a conflict of interest as it could potentially amount to a breach
of the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship of his previous client Mr. Sly. This
raises concerns of unethical conduct and potential violation of professional standards. Mr.
Mabunda had a prior attorney-client relationship with Mr. Sly, which involved the financial
transaction mentioned earlier. Given that Mr.Sly is an alleged kingpin of a criminal syndicate.
It is reasonable to assume that Mr. Mabunda may still possess confidential information that
could act contrary to the interests of his prior client, Mr. Sly and be of value to Ms. Belinda
Sly in the institution of divorce proceedings. With reference to Robinson4, it has to be
emphasized that an implied contract exists between the attorney and the client that
preserves the confidentiality of information between them. Additionally, the doctrine of
attorney-client privilege protects against the disclosure of this confidential information. The
attorney possesses the ethical duty to preserve the confidentiality of this information and this
duty remains in existence even after the termination of the attorney-client relationship. Mr.
Mabunda representing Ms. Belinda Sly while possessing confidential information due to his
prior relationship with Mr.Sly will result in a breach of the ethical principle of confidentiality
and constitute professional misconduct. It is a professional standard within the profession
that an attorney must maintain complete trust that all communication and information
between them and the client be regarded as confidential and unbeknownst to anyone but
them. Mr.Mabunda representing Ms. Belinda Sly would result in a violation of this, along with
standard of integrity and a clear indicator of a person unfit to continue to practice as an
attorney.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Mr.Bob Mabunda’s conduct in the scenario above demonstrates several

violations of the standards of professional ethics and responsibilities. These violations
include questionable billing practices, encouragement of unethical behavior, conflict of
interest, professional negligence regarding client funds, and the acceptance of
representation that could result in a breach of the confidentiality principle. The actions of Mr.
Bob Mabunda that violated professional ethics and responsibilities are sufficient enough to
consider him unfit and improper to practice as a legal practitioner if he were to face
disciplinary consequences.

4
Robinson v Hulsteyn Feltham & Ford 1925 AD 12
1255 words

Bibliography

https://www.derebus.org.za/ethics-time-to-reassess-legal-ethics-in-the-changing-envi
ronment/ (accessed 16 May 2023)

https://www.lssa.org.za/your-rights-as-a-client/

http://www.scielo.org.za (accessed 15 May 2023)

Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014

Mouton v Die Mynwerkersunie 1977 (1) SA 119 (A)

Mtshabe vs Law Society of the Cape of Good Hope 2014 (5) SA 376 (ECM)

Robinson v Hulsteyn Feltham & Ford 1925 AD 12:

Vassen v Law Society of the Cape 1998(4) 532 (SCA)