LPC confirms de Ru is a registered Advocate.

Henriet de Ru, the woman at the centre of the Sunbird Village levy dispute reported by The Public Dispatch on 3 July, is a registered advocate, admitted in 2008.

That is the formal confirmation of the Legal Practice Council (LPC), responding this week to written questions from The Public Dispatch.

The confirmation directly contradicts the LPC's own earlier letter to Sunbird Village homeowners, in which the regulator stated it was "unable to trace any registered legal practitioner operating under the name or style of Henriet De Ru."

According to the LPC's response, de Ru was admitted as an advocate in 2008, is registered with the Council, and holds practice number 29970, the same number that returned no result when searched on the LPC's public portal.

A regulator contradicting itself

Relying on the LPC's original letter, homeowner Celani Mlangeni opened a criminal case against de Ru for allegedly pretending to be an advocate. That case was withdrawn by the Senior Public Prosecutor within hours of being opened, a withdrawal that is now more explicable, the underlying premise, supplied in writing by the regulator itself, was wrong.

Registered but non-practising

The LPC's confirmation of de Ru's status, however, is not the end of the matter. According to the Council's records, de Ru is enrolled as a non-practising advocate. And on the legal consequences of that status, the regulator was unambiguous.

"Non-practising legal practitioners (whether attorneys or advocates) cannot offer legal services and receive payments for rendering legal services to the public this is misrepresentation," the LPC said in its written response.

"We reviewed the matter and located her records. In some instances, when information is received from the Department of Justice following the establishment of the Legal Practice Council, practitioners' records do not automatically appear on our system. As a result, our database may not immediately reflect some practitioners who have already been admitted," the LPC continued.

The Council further confirmed that de Ru has never been issued a Fidelity Fund certificate. In general, the LPC said, advocates cannot accept fees directly from members of the public, payment must flow through a briefing attorney. Only trust account advocates, who hold a Fidelity Fund certificate, may receive money directly,

"however it is only for specific matters such as RAF and not for any other purpose," the LPC said.

The question that remains open

The unresolved question is what, precisely, de Ru's role in the Sunbird Village dispute has been and whether it crossed the line into legal services rendered for reward.

Mlangeni alleged that De Ru personally served him with Court papers, warned of legal action, and gave instructions to the sheriff during the attachment of his household goods.

de Ru, for her part, told The Public Dispatch in response to the original investigation:

"I work as a consultant and mediator. I do not represent members of the public in court or take instructions directly from the public," de Ru told this publication.

The Public Dispatch has sent further questions to De Ru regarding the capacity in which she acts for the Sunbird Village Body Corporate and whether she receives payment for that work. Her response will be published once received.