Forensics for Justice has uncovered a letter which formed part of harassment court proceedings in the Pretoria Magistrates Court which took place on several occasions in 2020.
The letter dated 18 June 2019 authored by attorney Izak du Pisane of Loock du Pisane Attorneys of Lynnwood in Pretoria was addressed at the behest of Cora van der Merwe to her daughter Michelle van der Merwe concerning Michelle’s behavioural problems, and the fact that she had assaulted her mother.
Michelle van der Merwe is presently an attorney practicing in Pretoria, Gauteng, as a sole practitioner and should not be confused with an attorney of the same name who practices at VZLR Attorneys of Pretoria.
The letter, which has been translated from Afrikaans to English, and is self explanatory, reads as follows:
Dear Madam,
RE: CS VAN DER MERWE / / YOURSELF
We are act on behalf of Cornelia Sophia (Cora) Van der Merwe.
We are instructed to place the following on record.
2.1 It is common cause that you are our client’s daughter.
2.2 You moved back home during December 2018 and your recent behaviour has seriously affected our client’s well-being.
2.3 You severely assaulted our client last week by, among other things, knocking our client’s glasses off her face twice, pouring water on her computer, shouting loudly in her ear, pushing her around and throwing her to the ground, kicking her and hitting her with a hanger. Our client had to wear a neck brace for a day to make the pain bearable.
2.4 Our client’s eyelid was blue and swollen and our client could not sleep on her back for two nights due to all the bruises
2.5 Our client entertained a guest over the recent long weekend. You insulted the guest, belittled him and called him a “piece of shit”, threw his clothes around in the spare room and this morning hid his clothes. The guest had to lock himself in the spare room until you left the house for work.
2.6 Our client had to run away twice over the weekend to do her work in a restaurant at a very high cost, because you were making her life absolute hell.
2.7 You threw expensive Whisky that the guest had brought down the drain. Our client will now have to replace it at a very high cost.
2.8 Furthermore, our client was severely emotionally abused by you over the weekend and this is affecting her work..
2.9 Since you have been under our client’s roof, you have flourished academically. You still have one year of studies left for which our client pays.
2.10 Your unacceptable behaviour creates the impression that you want to isolate our client from her friends, her religion and free choices.
2.11 You regularly saw a psychiatrist until April 2019, and used medication for your mood disorders.
3. We have instructions to admonish you, as we do herewith, to immediately cease all negative and violent behaviour towards our client and her friends, failing which you will leave our client with no alternative but to approach the High Court for appropriate legal relief.
4. We place on record that the writer hereof has received instructions this morning to approach the High Court on an urgent basis as a result of your above-mentioned behaviour. Our client was advised to address this letter to you and that if your conduct does not improve or there is a recurrence or we do not receive the written undertaking as requested below, to then approach the Court.
5. Our client offers to pay for your treatment with a psychiatrist, which you discontinued after your father transferred you to a cheap medical plan.
6. We emphasise our instructions that your conduct is significantly affecting our client’s life, to the extent that our client is unable to work.
7. We would like to receive within 3 (Three) days from the date of this letter, a written undertaking that there will be no recurrence of your above-mentioned conduct and that you will see a psychiatrist as suggested by our client, failing which our client’s rights are reserved to approach the High Court for appropriate legal relief.
8. All of our client’s rights to disclose the contents of this letter to the Court are hereby reserved.
Yours sincerely,
LOOCK DU PISANIE GE-INK.
Per: I DU PISANIE
Read the Afrikaans letter here.
Van der Merwe finished her Practical Vocational Training as a Candidate Attorney after several attempts and in 2023 made application to the Pretoria High Court to be admitted as an attorney. On 8 February 2024 she sought a postponement of her admission application. The matter was called before Judge Bashier Vally and Acting-Judge Richard Mkhabela.
Judge Vally was clearly unimpressed with van der Merwe and made the following observation:
“There was no ways she was going to be admitted by this court; absolutely no ways. She did not put up an affidavit, which makes serious allegations against her; but she puts up her answer to the affidavit. Now how am I supposed to make sense of her answer, without actually having the affidavit itself to compare with? “
“She has got herself into some serious problems; allegations of getting involved with someone (Ronald Bobroff) who this court has already … and the Gauteng Court has already found to be a scoundrel with RAF monies taken; RAF monies .. run away to Australia. There is allegations of her getting involved in all of those things. Why? Long before you even been admitted, why are you getting into all of these things?”
Read the transcript here.
When ordering that van der Merwe matter be removed from the Court Roll, Judge Vally remarked:
“I do not think I have to say anything further ;
It is just going to get worse.“
Read the court order here.
Van der Merwe’s admission application was back before the Pretoria High Court on 4 November 2024 with Judge Fiona Dippenaar and Denise Lenyai presiding. By this time, journalist Tony Beamish had applied to intervene in van der Merwe’s admission application. Beamish raised a number of points – through his counsel on brief – Ben Winks – and the judges made an order by agreement between the parties.
Beamish submitted that van der Merwe was not a fit and proper person to be admitted as an attorney and raised a number of points for the court to consider, inter alia, the following:
- She had framed him for sexual assault in May/June 2019 at a time when his sleep app demonstrated that he was asleep and in bed. Her allegation surfaced for the first time in December 2019
- Two-and-a-half months before framing Beamish she had attempted to dig up dirt on Retired Supreme Court of Appeal Judge Fritz Brand, planning to tarnish his good name and reputation … “We are looking for something like allegations of sexual assault, tax evasion, etc.”
- She did not disclose in her founding affidavit (i) her close association with the Bobroffs; (ii) her knowing participation in a character assassination campaign waged by the Bobroffs against Mr Beamish; and (iii) the pending disciplinary complaints and court proceedings brought against her by Mr Beamish.
- She did not meet the technical requirements of the Legal Practice Act for the truncation of her Practical Vocational Training from two years to one.
A court order ensued and Van der Merwe was ordered to explain her conduct.
Read the court order here.
Read van der Merwe’s supplementary affidavit here.
Van der Merwe proceeded to have her admission application – by that time exceeding 4,000 pages – set down for the first day of the first 2025 court term, Monday 20 January 2025. It was presided over by Judge Patrick Kumalo and Acting-Judge Philemon Ledwaba (who is not related to Deputy-Judge President Aubrey Ledwaba).
No warning was given to the judges concerning the volume of court paper which would need to be written and considered before the application was to be heard, nor was regard head to a court directive the judges be advised when the record of proceeding exceeded 2,000 pages.
The online court file system, called `Caselines’, reveals that Acting-Judge Ledwaba first accessed the file on Thursday 16 January 2025 at 6:46PM and Judge Kumalo first accessed the file on Saturday 18 January 2025 at 7:49AM. The court session began at 10AM on Monday 20 January 2025 and it can therefore be deduced that Ledwaba AJ had eight-four hours and Kumalo J had fifty hours (without sleeping or doing anything else) to read and consider van der Merwe’s application which, by that stage, had, as already noted, had exceeded 4,000 pages – and it was not the only admission application on their court roll that day. In court that Monday, Kumalo adopted a bombastic approach, asking Beamish’s counsel, Ben Winks, “Why must we hear you? What is his locus standi in this matter?“
The two judges, following a perfunctory hearing, and with the concurrence of the Legal Practice Council, admitted Van der Merwe as an attorney.
On 22 January 2025, lawyers acting for Beamish sought written reasons from the judges for their decision.
It did not seem to phase Judge Kumalo or Acting-Judge Ledwaba that van der Merwe had battered her own mother, Cora Van der Merwe, black and blue – something which on the face of it is a criminal offence.
Postscript: as at 22 March 2026, fourteen months later, the judges had not provided their reasons.
On 5 September 2025, lawyers acting for Mr Beamish filed an application for leave to appeal the admission order. The judges then offered to hear Beamish’s application for leave to appeal but absent the reasoning of the judges, such an application was pointless.
Read the Application for Leave to Appeal here.