A full bench of the Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg has set aside the decision to remove Kempton Park Chief Magistrate Judith van Schalkwyk from office. The ruling, handed down in August 2026, directs the Magistrates Commission to reconsider the disciplinary sanction initially imposed in 2022.
Legal Basis For Reconsideration
Van Schalkwyk was originally found guilty of 13 separate disciplinary charges, leading to her removal from the bench. However, in 2024, High Court Judge Leonard Twala set aside nine of those charges, leaving only four standing.
Writing for the full bench, Judge Leicester Adams stated that the original removal was based on a collective set of findings that had since been significantly diminished. He argued that the commission must now weigh the remaining four charges—which include rude conduct, accepting R34,000 from an attorney, and failing to pay court parking fees—in isolation.
If a person is sanctioned on the basis of a finding that she is guilty of misconduct on thirteen charges and the finding of guilty in respect of nine of those charges are set aside, the sanction ought, at the very least, be remitted to the decision-maker for reconsideration, if it is not reduced.
It matters not that there may or may not be one charge in respect of which a finding of guilt remains, which is serious enough to in itself possibly warrant the sanction imposed.
Implications For Judicial Discipline
The court’s decision highlights the critical need for proportionality when administrative bodies determine the removal of judicial officers. The ruling suggests that maintaining a removal sanction after a majority of charges are dismissed constitutes a potential misdirection by the presiding disciplinary authority.
This case has been a protracted matter, with allegations of misconduct against Van Schalkwyk dating back to approximately 2019. The Magistrates Commission must now review the appropriateness of the removal, given that the legal framework of the initial sanction has been altered by the High Court’s findings.
It remains to be seen how the Magistrates Commission will interpret the directive to reconsider the sanction for the four remaining charges. Our reporter will continue to monitor the commission’s official bulletins for updates on the next steps in these proceedings.