I just wrote a long blog about thecourts and how they view Law Societies and how little chance one has once a decision has to been taken to proceed with one's striking.  It got lost in a crash, so for now, rather than not write at all, I'll quote from a judgment in the Cape recently where the Law Society applied to suspend an attorney Andre Berrange, of the firm Buchanan Boyes, after evidence came to light of "marketing agreements" entered into with SEEFF and PAM GOLDING where essentially they were paid R1000 per transfer referred to them.  The Judge held that, "The Court is not bound by the views of the applicant.  On the other hand it is not an ordinary litigant .... the applicant's views should accordingly be given proper weight."

My comments dealt with the whole voting process at Law Society meetings, the next one which takes place the whole of Friday, but my fury with my computer and limited time now means I'll have to try and cover it another time!  Save but to say I did say that litigation with your own professional society is not something to get into!

Oh yes, Sabina came 2nd - beaten very narrowly by a mare carrying 9 kilograms more than her - so effectively, at level weights she would have beaten the field by more than 8,5 lengths - a thrashing - which shows how sad it is that in the interest of betting, top horses are effectively crippled under heavy weights.