Unethical behaviour (which can be proven) by various employees at the Krugersdorp Magistrate’s office…. From Clerks, a Magistrate and the Chief Magistrate….
The Clerks in the civil case office as well as the Senior Admin Officer Refused to give the Defendant (D) in the matter access to the court file (which is public record, isn't it?). He even shouted at the defendant to the extent that the court manager approached the D to give her email address for the details of what happened.
The staff in that office are extremely unfriendly, unhelpful (this is not the only complaint about it). They eat when they are suppose to assist people but yet strictly close for lunch at lunch time. At times no one of the 3 - 4 staff members is in the office and the office is locked even during office hours (e.g. 14:20, 14:40, 15:00, 15:25). There is no sign stating court files could only be viewed in the morning and was sometimes allowed in the afternoon but at a certain stage ….was told, it must be done before 1pm.
Documents were stamped on the date it was filed but in Nov ‘23 when filing a document just after 14:30 ..was told if submitted after this time they can only stamp the next day’s date…(Is this now normal practice??)
At Pre-trial on 5/10/23, which the D was forced to have without an attorney, Trial date was set (for 21/11) without the matter being Trial ready and the magistrate Removed 15 Court documents filed by the D. She stated in a very condescending tone of voice - she doesn’t want this in her court file and threw it onto a heap towards where the D sat. Apparently that should not be allowed (official court documents) - even the clerk was shocked to hear that and stated it’s not allowed. (The D is now in possession of the original docs). Due to these being removed the magistrate (at trial 21/11) was unaware of very important information.
As pages were removed page numbers obviously changed and the Defendant wanted to check the new page Nrs to change on the copy she gave to the new attorney after the previous attorney who had a copy suddenly withdrew shortly prior to pre-trial (set for 3/08) under suspicious circumstances… She stated that the chief magistrate and the opposing party’s attorney asked her if it doesn’t bother her that the Plaintiff is a Magistrate (after that the D never heard form her again for over a month when she contacted the director to find out if she is still her attorney?).
For this purpose the court file was viewed on 3 different dates (close to each other) due to the fact that ..couldn’t finish checking due to the staff’s lunch time and long time delay due to refusal of clerks to give access and could only, much later, be viewed in the Snr Admin manager’s office. The file looked different each time (got evidence of this). It was also noticed that the file was not ready for trial (which happened on 21/11 but was postponed due to illness) - mentioned by a clerk himself as page numbers were not correct (some numbers missing).
Documents were added in an index where it was previously not added in and a copy was made of a particular document (previously dated 16/11) and the date stamp on it changed - Now back-dated to 14/11. This index stamped date was 25/05 on 28th Nov. and was on 5th Dec. stamped 14/11 (didn’t know they are allowed to back date the court stamp..??).
The chief magistrate stated to the D before that ‘pre-trial will have to be finalised with or without her attorney’ - being fully aware that she was waiting to be allocated a new attorney from Legal Aid after the previous attorney from LA suddenly withdrew 3 days before pre-trial which was set for 30/5. (This attorney refused to return documents to the D and also refused to follow instruction, which directly benefited the Plaintiff).
The D requested an attorney in a Snr. position to the plaintiff (a regional magistrate) in order to have a better change at a fair trial, as he is well known in the area and all the magistrates in the area are his junior and close colleagues and because the D was told by all attorneys since the beginning of this matter (July) 2019 that they cannot take her case as they appear in front of this magistrate on a weekly basis. (Court documents stating this, were among those which were removed by the magistrate).
(The Plaintiff, a magistrate in his personal capacity, made a Defamation of character case against the D after she pointed out his mistake (misconduct..??) in unfairly dismissing an employee at the residential complex where he was a trustee - "Dismissal unfair in both substance and procedure" - proven by CCMA).
The D asked postponement - from opposing party, chief magistrate (as he arranged a Magistrate from another province) and that Magistrate himself, as she could not obtain an attorney in such a short period of time. It was denied since the beginning of October. The chief magistrate threatened that the D is liable to pay the cost for the Magistrate from another province (should it be postponed). (It appears that according to protocol it should have been arranged by the magistrate’s office themselves without request by the Defendant).
This is absolute unacceptable, unprofessional behaviour and completely unfair treatment towards someone whom a senior member of the department of Justice has a personal issue with. The Judiciary system is suppose to be fair and treat all the same - not to discriminate against someone who is the opposing party in a case their colleague made.
0 comments