- Banathi Olwethu Masoka has been struck off the roll of legal practitioners after a series of serious acts of misconduct during his time as a registrar at the High Court in Pretoria.
- The allegations included fraudulent court orders and tax bills, among them a divorce order in a case that did not exist.
- The court found Masoka’s actions showed dishonesty and a lack of integrity, making his continued presence in the legal profession impossible.
A man who went to Home Affairs to obtain his marriage certificate discovered that official records showed he was already divorced, despite never having been through a divorce.
This discovery prompted an investigation into a divorce order with his name and a case number unrelated to his marriage. The order had been issued by Masoka while he served as a registrar at the High Court in Pretoria.
These circumstances formed part of the broader misconduct case that ended Masoka’s legal career. The High Court found he was not a fit and proper person to remain on the roll and ordered that his name be struck off.
Acting Judge T Ngeno, with Judge JS Nyathi concurring, handed down the judgment in July 2026 in an application brought by the South African Legal Practice Council.
Fraudulent orders from the registrar’s office
Masoka, admitted as an advocate in 2011, was employed as registrar at the Pretoria High Court. He faced eight disciplinary charges, including dereliction of duty, breach of fiduciary duties, negligence, and dishonesty.
The charges concerned several fraudulent or invalid default judgments and tax bills issued for legal firms, many related to Road Accident Fund matters, in breach of court directives. His official court stamp and signature appeared on the disputed documents. Masoka had claimed his stamp went missing, but he never reported it; it later resurfaced.
Further disputed documents surfaced during the investigation, including a divorce order and tax bills issued against directives. Masoka was found to have issued an order on a Sunday and handled matters not allocated to him, sometimes granting default judgments that other registrars had refused. The financial impact could have exceeded R10 million if the unlawful bills were not rescinded.
Discovery of a supposed divorce
The fraudulent divorce order was especially troubling. Mr Skosana discovered he was listed as divorced when seeking his marriage certificate at Home Affairs. Neither the High Court nor the Regional Court had any record of a divorce case involving him. He eventually obtained a copy of the order through the Government Employees Pension Fund and learned the case number belonged to a different matter.
An investigator confirmed Masoka issued the order, and it bore his signature, dated Sunday, 29 May 2023, under the name of a judge who was not presiding. The disciplinary chairperson found Masoka guilty on seven of eight charges, and he was dismissed.
Masoka withdraws from the disciplinary hearing
Masoka disputed the allegations and said the process was unfair and biased, claiming difficulties with superiors and lack of proper legal representation. He initially participated in the disciplinary hearing but later withdrew, alleging unfairness. Although he tried to resign before the hearing concluded, his employer required him to serve his notice.
The High Court found Masoka had opportunities to defend himself but chose not to. The judgment noted he abandoned the hearing and could not later contest its findings. The court also rejected his attempt to revisit the disciplinary case during the striking-off proceedings.
Court declares dishonesty incompatible with legal practice
The Legal Practice Council argued Masoka’s conduct made him unfit to practise, and the court agreed. Judge Ngeno stressed that legal practitioners must uphold the highest standards of honesty, integrity, and dignity. The misconduct was serious because it occurred within the court and involved someone with duties to the justice system.
The court found Masoka misled the public into believing at least one order was authorised by a judge, calling these calculated attempts to deceive. The judges concluded he was not fit and proper to remain a legal practitioner and that removal from the roll was the only appropriate outcome.
Masoka is no longer allowed to practise
The court rejected Masoka’s argument that the Legal Practice Council should have held a separate disciplinary hearing first. It found the High Court retained the authority to deal with such matters directly.
As a result, the court ordered Masoka’s name be struck from the roll and required him to hand over his certificate of enrolment. If he failed to do so within two weeks, the Sheriff was authorised to retrieve it. He was also barred from serving in any role as executor, curator, trustee, or similar positions and was ordered to pay costs on an attorney-and-client scale.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
