BLOEMFONTEIN – In a scathing condemnation of legal practitioner misconduct, the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) has struck an appeal by convicted sex offender Warren Carl Pace from the roll, refusing to condone severe procedural delays that left the case in a state of chaos.
The unanimous judgment, penned by acting judge of appeal O Mooki, with Deputy President W Hughes and judges A Kgoele, R Keightley and P Coppin concurring, issued a stern warning against the growing trend of lawyers disregarding court rules with impunity.
Pace was originally convicted in the Wynberg Regional Court on multiple serious charges, including the sexual grooming of children, exposing minors to pornography, attempted rape, sexual assault and child abuse. He was sentenced to an effective 15 years’ imprisonment.
Although the Western Cape High Court subsequently acquitted him on three counts, it confirmed his 15-year prison sentence, declared him unfit to possess a firearm and ordered his inclusion in the National Register for Sex Offenders.
Appeal delayed by missed court deadlines
After obtaining special leave to appeal to the SCA in November 2023, Pace’s legal representation unravelled into a series of serious procedural failures.
Under the SCA rules, the notice of appeal was due in January 2024 but was filed nearly two months late. The official court record was submitted a month late without any application for condonation, while heads of argument due in August 2024 were only delivered more than a year later, in December 2025.
As a result of these failures, the appeal had lapsed.
To explain the delays, a senior paralegal from William Booth Attorneys deposed to an affidavit blaming a former staff member who had resigned. However, the court noted that no confirmatory affidavits were provided by either the former employee or the attorney of record.
SCA condemns ‘shambolic’ legal representation
Compounding the misconduct, on the eve of the scheduled hearing in July, the attorneys purported to enter into an unauthorised agreement, relying on a non-existent rule, to dispense with oral argument entirely.
The State was also criticised for failing to serve properly stamped heads of argument timeously.
Judge Mooki described the legal representation as “shambolic”, observing that the legal practitioners had wasted scarce judicial resources and deprived other compliant litigants of hearing dates.
The SCA reaffirmed that litigants cannot indefinitely escape the consequences of their attorneys’ gross lack of diligence.
Refusing the application for condonation, the court struck the appeal from the roll. To ensure that Pace was not penalised for his legal team’s incompetence, the court expressly ordered that he would not be liable for any legal costs associated with the failed condonation application or the court appearance.
ALSO READ: Two sentenced in R1.07m Standard Bank impersonation fraud case
