A Black advocate with 15 years of experience received just one government brief in six years, according to evidence highlighted during the Pretoria High Court hearing over the Legal Sector Code in May.
Consider what that means for someone who has spent years studying law, qualifying as an advocate and building a professional career.
A legal qualification does not pay the rent. Admission to the Bar does not guarantee an income. And experience means little commercially when the institutions controlling lucrative legal work deny you opportunities.
That is the reality behind Wednesday’s judgment overturning Trade Minister Parks Tau’s Legal Sector Code.
READ MORE: ‘The white world doesn’t want us’: Muzi Sikhakhane argues in court
The court ruled that Tau failed to exercise his statutory powers properly. It set aside his decision to introduce rules intended to accelerate black ownership, professional advancement and access to legal work.
But what does that mean for lawyers whose livelihoods depend on the opportunities those rules sought to create?
For a Black attorney running a small practice, the immediate consequence is not necessarily the loss of an existing client. The ruling does not cancel contracts or prohibit the government from briefing Black lawyers.
Instead, it removes a sector-specific framework designed to influence how law firms and major clients distribute economic opportunities.
The difference matters because transformation is not simply about entering the profession. It is about earning enough to remain in it, grow a business and acquire economic independence.
The cost of waiting for work
Consider a small black-owned law firm competing against an established commercial practice. Both may employ qualified attorneys. Both may offer competent legal services. But one has decades of corporate relationships, established clients and financial resources. The other must still build those advantages.
Without a steady flow of instructions, the smaller firm struggles to hire additional lawyers, invest in specialised expertise and compete for larger contracts.
The consequences extend beyond the owner.
A firm that cannot expand cannot employ more candidate attorneys, recruit administrative staff or create training opportunities for young graduates.
For a Black woman advocate, exclusion from complex commercial litigation can carry another consequence.
READ MORE: Black women lawyers will be ‘back out in the cold’ if code falls, court told
She may practise for years without receiving the kinds of briefs that build the experience and reputation required for senior appointments.
During the court hearing, the National Association of Democratic Lawyers argued that Black women remained disadvantaged by unequal briefing patterns. Its counsel described how established firms and practitioners continued to receive lucrative and specialised work while others struggled for opportunities.
The Legal Sector Code sought to change those arrangements. It proposed targets for black ownership, management, skills development and legal procurement.
However, the court found that Tau had not independently justified the proposed framework.
That administrative failure has left its intended beneficiaries facing renewed uncertainty.
The contradiction in state spending
There is another uncomfortable reality.
The government is one of the country’s major purchasers of legal services.
In the 2024/25 financial year, it paid approximately R1.28-billion in legal fees. About 88% went to previously disadvantaged practitioners, according to Deputy Justice Minister Andries Nel.
Yet Nel acknowledged complaints that lucrative state work continued flowing to major commercial firms.
Both statements deserve scrutiny.
READ MORE: BBC backs Legal Sector Code in transformation court battle
It is possible to increase the number of black lawyers receiving briefs while leaving the most profitable and career-building work concentrated among established practitioners.
The critical measure is therefore not merely how many briefs black lawyers receive.
It is also their value, complexity and contribution to professional advancement.
A black advocate who receives numerous small instructions may earn less and gain less specialised experience than someone who is repeatedly instructed in major commercial disputes.
For the public, these inequalities also raise questions about access to legal services.
Sustainable local practices can potentially expand the availability of legal representation, particularly outside major commercial centres.
But transformation targets alone cannot guarantee affordable legal services. That requires separate attention to costs, geographic access and the needs of ordinary litigants.
What happens next
The High Court did not reject these objectives. It rejected the manner in which Tau exercised his powers.
Existing state briefing policies can still support transformation, while the minister reconsiders the sector code.
But the judges imposed no deadline for his decision.
For established firms, the ruling removes the immediate legal effect of the contested sector-specific requirements, subject to any appeal.
For struggling practitioners, it means uncertainty over when a replacement framework will emerge and whether it will improve their access to work.
And for government, it exposes the price of failing to turn political commitments into lawful, effective decisions.
The real test will not be another announcement promising transformation.
It will be whether more Black practitioners can secure substantial work, build sustainable businesses, become equity owners and employ the next generation of lawyers.
For a lawyer waiting for the telephone to ring with a paying client, transformation is not just a constitutional slogan; it is the difference between having a profession and earning a living from it.
- A Black advocate with 15 years of experience received only one government brief in six years, highlighting barriers to economic opportunity despite qualifications.
- The Pretoria High Court overturned Trade Minister Parks Tau's Legal Sector Code, ruling Tau failed to properly exercise statutory powers in introducing transformation rules.
- The ruling removes a sector-specific framework aimed at boosting Black ownership, professional advancement, and access to legal work but does not cancel existing contracts or prohibit government briefing of Black lawyers.
- The government spent approximately R1.28-billion on legal fees in 2024/25, with 88% going to previously disadvantaged practitioners, though lucrative work remains concentrated among established commercial firms.
- The High Court's decision creates uncertainty for Black practitioners awaiting a replacement framework while established firms regain immediate relief from sector-specific transformation requirements.
