Lopes Attorneys Inc

Lopes Attorneys Inc Lopes Attorneys Inc is a dynamic and internationally recognised boutique law firm dedicated to delivering cutting-edge legal solutions.

We provide exceptional legal counsel with integrity and a deep understanding of our clients’ needs.

Many South African family businesses that have been built over decades still rely on succession arrangements that were p...
23/06/2026

Many South African family businesses that have been built over decades still rely on succession arrangements that were put in place years, and sometimes decades, ago. While the business itself has evolved, the structures governing ownership, control, and succession have often remained unchanged.

Problems can arise when ownership needs to pass to the next generation. Shareholding structures may no longer reflect the family's intentions, shareholder agreements may not adequately deal with retirement, incapacity, death, or the exit of a family member, and estate and trust planning arrangements may no longer align with current tax and regulatory requirements.

These issues are often overlooked while the founder remains actively involved in the business. They tend to come to the forefront only when a transition becomes necessary, at which point resolving them can be considerably more difficult and costly.

The consequences can be significant. Disputes between family members, uncertainty regarding control of the business, unintended tax liabilities, and delays in implementing succession plans can all place unnecessary strain on both the business and the family.

Succession planning should not be regarded as a once-off exercise. Periodic reviews help ensure that ownership arrangements remain appropriate, shareholder agreements remain effective, and the business is positioned for a smooth transition when the time comes.

For many family businesses, reviewing existing succession arrangements today can help avoid costly disputes and unnecessary complications in the future.

Father’s Day is right around the corner, putting a natural spotlight on how South African family law has evolved to supp...
19/06/2026

Father’s Day is right around the corner, putting a natural spotlight on how South African family law has evolved to support modern fathers.

Under the Children's Act 38 of 2005, parenting is a partnership of responsibilities and rights, including care, contact, guardianship, and financial maintenance. While married fathers acquire parental responsibilities and rights automatically, unmarried fathers may also acquire them automatically if they meet the requirements set out in the Act, without needing to obtain a court order.

South African courts generally favour arrangements that promote the meaningful involvement of both parents where this is in the child's best interests. Maintenance obligations remain strictly enforced, with the Maintenance Court playing a central role in ensuring that children receive adequate financial support.

A milestone development in South African employment law occurred when the Constitutional Court ruled in Van Wyk that the existing parental leave framework unfairly discriminated between different categories of parents. As an interim measure, the Court ordered that parents share a collective entitlement of four months and ten days of parental leave, which they may allocate between themselves. This landmark judgment represents a decisive step toward achieving greater equality in parenting responsibilities.

While challenges remain, particularly in the enforcement of contact rights and maintenance orders, South Africa's family law framework continues to evolve in pursuit of more balanced, child-centred outcomes.

This Father's Day, we recognise the important role fathers play and the value of a legal system that supports responsible parenting and promotes the best interests of children.

19/06/2026

We are pleased to share that our article on the future of captive elephants in South Africa appears in the latest edition of Sentience Magazine.

The piece examines the Johannesburg Zoo elephants case and broader questions around welfare standards for highly sentient animals in captive environments. The issue also features a range of thoughtful articles.

You can read the full June 2026 edition here:

In the late 1990s and early 2000s, South Africa stood at the centre of a major international dispute over access to life...
18/06/2026

In the late 1990s and early 2000s, South Africa stood at the centre of a major international dispute over access to life-saving HIV medication. This is the story of how the country used domestic law to defend public health and helped shape global debates on affordable medicines. Swipe through to see how it unfolded.

Yesterday South Africa observed Youth Day, commemorating the courage of the young students who, on 16 June 1976, fought ...
17/06/2026

Yesterday South Africa observed Youth Day, commemorating the courage of the young students who, on 16 June 1976, fought back against the injustices of Bantu Education and the imposition of Afrikaans as a medium of instruction in Soweto.

The protest became a turning point in our country’s history. It pushed South Africa toward democracy and helped shape constitutional protections of dignity, equality, and education that guide our society today.

Young people have long been at the forefront of the struggle for a more just society in South Africa. The rights they fought for are still being interpreted, tested and defended in our courts.

We honour the bravery of those students. Now, the responsibility lies on us to ensure that the promises contained in our Constitution become a daily reality for the young people of South Africa.

Among the leading South African authorities on letters of credit is the Supreme Court of Appeal’s decision in Loomcraft ...
12/06/2026

Among the leading South African authorities on letters of credit is the Supreme Court of Appeal’s decision in Loomcraft Fabrics CC v Nedbank Ltd (1996), a case that clarified the autonomy of such instruments and the limited circumstances in which payment may be restrained.

Nedbank issued an irrevocable letter of credit on behalf of its customer, Loomcraft Fabrics CC, to secure payment for a fabric supply contract with a Portuguese manufacturer. The arrangement led to litigation when Loomcraft sought to interdict payment following a dispute over the quality of the goods and alleged misrepresentation in the shipping documents.

The Supreme Court of Appeal ruled decisively in favour of Nedbank. The court determined that the letter of credit was autonomous and independent of the underlying contract. Provided the documents complied with the terms of the credit, the bank was obliged to pay, irrespective of any disputes between the buyer and seller. The only exception is where the bank has clear knowledge of fraud by the beneficiary.

The practical significance of Loomcraft extended beyond the immediate dispute. By reaffirming the autonomy of letters of credit and the limited scope of the fraud exception, the judgment provided greater certainty regarding the obligations of issuing banks. It also reinforced the need for careful drafting and risk assessment when issuing documentary credit instruments, given the limited circumstances in which payment may lawfully be withheld.

The Loomcraft decision remains a leading authority governing how demand guarantees and letters of credit operate in South Africa today. It emphasises certainty of payment while placing greater responsibility on banks and applicants alike.

The doctrine of legitimate expectation remains of the more practical and powerful tools in our law for protecting partie...
09/06/2026

The doctrine of legitimate expectation remains of the more practical and powerful tools in our law for protecting parties who have been led to believe that a particular outcome or process will follow.

Although it originated in administrative law as a safeguard of procedural fairness, the principle has steadily found application in commercial disputes. Even without a formal contract, courts have shown themselves willing to hold a party accountable where clear promises, consistent conduct, or repeated assurances have created a reasonable expectation on which another party has relied.

The foundational authority is Administrator, Transvaal v Traub 1989 (4) SA 731 (A), which established that where a public authority (and, by extension, private parties in appropriate circumstances) creates a legitimate expectation of being heard or of receiving a benefit, that expectation cannot lightly be disregarded. Subsequent cases have extended this thinking into tender processes, long-term business relationships, regulatory assurances, and commercial dealings where one party’s conduct has induced reasonable reliance by the other.

This means that informal statements such as “don’t worry, we’ll renew the contract”, repeated extensions of credit, or established patterns of conduct can become legally significant if a party has acted to its detriment in reliance upon them. South African courts are increasingly prepared to intervene where it would be unfair to allow a party to resile from the expectation it created.

For businesses operating in South Africa, a proper appreciation of this doctrine is important. In an environment where many commercial relationships still rest on trust, verbal understandings, and long-standing practices, the law’s willingness to enforce legitimate expectations adds a valuable layer of certainty and fairness to commercial dealings.

South Africa’s Animals Protection Act dates back to 1962. Because this legal framework is outdated, the real momentum fo...
08/06/2026

South Africa’s Animals Protection Act dates back to 1962. Because this legal framework is outdated, the real momentum for animal welfare is happening in the private sector.

Several major retailers and food producers are voluntarily adopting higher standards than the law requires. We see this in commitments to cage-free eggs, free-range farming, and reduced livestock confinement. Woolworths, for example, has referenced the Five Freedoms to operate well above legal minimums.

Yet, voluntary commitments face notable scrutiny. Animal welfare organisations, including Beauty Without Cruelty, have strongly criticised Woolworths for its continued use of carbon dioxide (CO2) gas chamber stunning in its pork supply chain. Critics rightly point out that this practice causes severe distress to pigs and fundamentally contradicts high welfare standards.

While Woolworths defends the method by pointing to legal compliance, and a related complaint was dismissed by the Advertising Regulatory Board, the issue remains highly contentious. Commercial cost pressures cannot be used to excuse or normalise inhumane practices. This friction highlights the urgent need to distinguish between true, meaningful welfare improvements and mere market spin.

In South Africa, this shift goes deeper than global trends. It directly intersects with our core constitutional values of dignity and ubuntu, reminding us that our societal responsibility extends to the protection of sentient beings.

The Woolworths case proves that voluntary standards do not shield a company from controversy. Instead, they invite closer public inspection. Ultimately, commitments mean very little without transparent supply chain oversight, evidence-based practices, and a real willingness to adapt when welfare outcomes fall short of ethical goals.

Overall, animal welfare is moving from a compliance checkbox to a central element of corporate governance. As consumers demand higher standards, businesses that engage with these issues authentically and rigorously will be far better positioned to maintain long-term trust.

In South Africa, the law governing the recording of conversations is primarily found in the Regulation of Interception o...
05/06/2026

In South Africa, the law governing the recording of conversations is primarily found in the Regulation of Interception of Communications and Provision of Communication-Related Information Act (RICA).

If you are a direct participant in a conversation, you may lawfully record it without obtaining the consent of the other parties. This applies whether the discussion takes place in person, over the phone, or via electronic means. The key requirement is that you must be an active part of the conversation. You cannot secretly record discussions to which you are not a party.

However, there are important limitations. Recordings made with the intention of committing an offence remain unlawful. Furthermore, while the recording itself may be legal, its admissibility in court or disciplinary proceedings is not automatic. Admissibility will depend on factors such as relevance, fairness, and whether the recording was obtained in breach of any other legal duty, such as an expectation of privacy in specific employment or contractual contexts.

For businesses and individuals alike, understanding these boundaries is essential. A recording that complies with RICA may provide valuable evidence in litigation, disciplinary proceedings, or other disputes. However, recordings made outside the scope of RICA may expose the recorder to both civil and criminal consequences.

Many South Africans believe that long-term cohabitation is legally equivalent to marriage. It is not.When an unmarried r...
03/06/2026

Many South Africans believe that long-term cohabitation is legally equivalent to marriage. It is not.

When an unmarried relationship ends, there is generally no automatic right to a division of assets or an entitlement to a share of your partner’s assets, regardless of how long your relationship lasted.

Without a cohabitation agreement or other clear legal arrangement, disputes often rely on complex claims such as universal partnership or unjustified enrichment, both of which require substantial evidence of financial contribution, shared intention, and a common enterprise, making them costly and time-consuming to litigate.

We frequently see situations where one partner contributes significantly to a property over many years, only to later discover that enforcing a claim can be legally challenging because their name does not appear on the title deed. While legal remedies may exist, Success depends heavily on the specific facts and available evidence.

Formal marriage provides a comprehensive statutory framework for the protection and division of assets, which is usually unavailable to unmarried cohabitants. The law does not automatically protect a relationship based solely on its duration.

If you are in a long-term unmarried partnership, one of the most practical steps you can take is to conclude a cohabitation agreement. It can provide clarity regarding ownership and financial responsibilities, and set out how potential disputes will be managed, thereby reducing uncertainty, limiting legal costs, and protecting what you have built together.

Address

Stonemill Office Park, 300 Acacia Road
Johannesburg
2195

Opening Hours

Monday 08:00 - 17:00
Tuesday 08:00 - 17:00
Wednesday 08:00 - 17:00
Thursday 08:00 - 17:00
Friday 08:00 - 17:00

Telephone

+27115686837

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Lopes Attorneys Inc posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Practice

Send a message to Lopes Attorneys Inc:

Shortcuts

Share

Category