This blog is co-authored Yuveshen Naidoo, candidate attorney.

A High Court judgment has confirmed that advocates with trust accounts cannot institute and prosecute Road Accident Fund claims on behalf of clients. This clarification is important for both legal practitioners and members of the public seeking to claim compensation from the RAF.

The claimant sought default judgment against the RAF. The summons and particulars of claim had been signed solely by the claimant’s advocate, who held a trust account. The draft order directed payment directly into the advocate’s trust account. The court noted that there were no attorneys on record for the claimant, and the advocate relied on a letter from the Legal Practice Council purporting to authorise her to act in this capacity.

Section 19 of the Road Accident Fund Act sets out who may institute and prosecute claims against the RAF. It states that only attorneys, or certain state employees, may do so on behalf of claimants. The Act specifically excludes anyone else from instituting or prosecuting such claims. This means that, even if an advocate holds a trust account and a Fidelity Fund certificate, they are not authorised to act as an attorney in RAF matters.

The court refused to grant default judgment, referring to an earlier judgment, which made it clear that the Legal Practice Act and the Uniform Rules of Court maintain a distinction between the roles of attorneys and advocates, even after the introduction of trust account advocates.

The court found that the Legal Practice Council had exceeded its authority by issuing letters purporting to allow advocates with trust accounts to act in RAF matters. The court held that such letters are ultra vires the RAF Act and cannot override the clear wording of the legislation.

The separation of roles between attorneys and advocates is longstanding. Attorneys are required to complete two years of articles and pass specific admission exams, while advocates follow a different route to admission. The rules have not been changed to allow trust account advocates to perform the work of attorneys in RAF claims. Pleadings in these matters must be signed by an attorney or an attorney and an advocate, not by an advocate alone.

Claimants should ensure that their legal representatives are properly authorised to act in these matters to avoid unnecessary delays or the risk of their claims being dismissed.

Read the full judgment here: https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2025/787.html