- Says his and his firm’s reputations have been soiled
- Tafa now consulting on the next course of action against LSB
The Managing Partner at Collins Newman and Company, Parks Tafa, says he has not taken lightly prejudice that he allegedly suffered at the hands of the Law Society of Botswana (LSB) recently that has left his hard-earned reputation and that of his firm tainted.
In 2019 Tafa’s application for a fidelity fund certificate, which is used by legal practitioners to apply for a practising certificate, was rejected by LSB on the grounds that there were irregularities with Tafa’s firm’s books as allegedly confirmed by the audit report. The rejection led to Tafa and his firm being removed from the roll of legal practitioners by the Master and Registrar of the High Court.
Speaking to The Botswana Gazette about his impressions of the case that he recently won, Tafa said his firm went through “a very difficult period” during the trial and suffered serious reputational and economic harm as a result of malice.
“I am still consulting on the way forward after all that transpired,” he said. “As you may be aware, a doctor does not treat himself. My hope is that once advised, I will make a determination on the way forward.”
Tafa added that despite his shock at the turn of events, he responded accordingly to clear his name and has been vindicated by the courts.
Tafa’s victory came after he made a counter-application at the High Court seeking a fidelity certificate and subsequently a practising certificate.
The court then ruled that the refusal by the LSB to issue him a fidelity certificate was unlawful and ordered that he be granted it and accordingly for the Registrar of the High Court to restore Tafa’s name on the roll. But the LSB appealed the decision at the Court of
Appeal seeking clarity on the powers exercised by the Registrar and if the High Court was right to overrule them. As it turned out, Tafa still emerged victorious.
The court said since LSB did not seek to stay the orders of the fidelity and the practising certificate pending finalisation of the appeal, there were none issues as Tafa and his firm had complied fully. LSB had only sought the appeal on grounds that the court should give clear guidance as to the powers of the Registrar who removed Tafa from the roll of practitioners and if the counter-application at the High Court and the orders there given were appropriate since the Registrar had exercised his powers concerning the matter.