Attorney Kaamilah Paulse addresses allegations of misleading courts in family law dispute

Attorney Kaamilah Paulse has submitted a detailed response to the Legal Practice Council (LPC) regarding multiple complaints lodged by Johannesburg-based father of two Asif Casoojee, as the high-profile family law dispute continues to draw national attention and controversy.

In a letter dated 9 December 2025 to the LPC, Paulse addressed a series of complaints filed by Casoojee in October and November this year, defending her professional conduct and explaining events in two separate court proceedings.

The correspondence, seen by The Star, outlines her position on allegations that she misled courts and acted outside her professional responsibilities.

Paulse begins by noting her long legal career and asserts that she has maintained an unblemished professional record. She describes the conduct of the complainant as unusually aggressive and beyond what she has encountered in family law.

The response deals in detail with complaints arising from two matters: an interim protection order application in the Randburg Magistrate’s Court in May 2025 and a five‑day trial in the Cape Town Magistrate’s Court in 2023.

Paulse acknowledges that on one occasion she provided counsel with instructions based on her recollection of prior proceedings, which later proved factually incorrect. She attributes this to being taken by surprise in court and the emotional toll of the ongoing dispute.

Paulse expressed remorse for the error and accepted it as a serious departure from professional diligence, stressing that there was no intention to mislead the court. This is the stance Casoogee believes Paulse purposefully and deliberately misled the court.

Paulse’s response comes amid mounting public scrutiny of her conduct. In March 2025 the LPC Appeals Tribunal found prima facie evidence of professional misconduct against her, after Casoojee’s appeal of his initial complaint.

The tribunal said Casoojee presented evidence that Paulse had obtained a protection order without proper service and may have interfered in family law matters in ways that restricted his access to his children’s records and communication, describing some actions as amounting to parental alienation. The tribunal’s findings did not constitute a final disciplinary decision, and the matter was referred back to the LPC’s Disciplinary Committee for further investigation.

The case has also drawn commentary and concern from civil society. The African Transformation Movement (ATM) has publicly called on legal authorities to prioritise ethical conduct and the best interests of children, urging calm and transparency amid the allegations. The party emphasised that children’s welfare should remain at the centre of public discourse and legal processes.

Judge Siraj Desai, South Africa’s Legal Services Ombud, has said he will monitor disciplinary proceedings against Paulse closely, acknowledging the sensitivity of allegations in family law contexts and the importance of a thorough investigation.

Herold Gie Attorneys, where Paulse is a senior attorney, has repeatedly stated that it disagrees with the tribunal’s decision and that Paulse intends to challenge the allegations. The firm emphasised that no final findings have been made and that Paulse remains confident she acted within professional and legal standards.

The LPC’s Disciplinary Committee has yet to conclude its hearing into the complaints, and the matter may intersect with ongoing litigation in the High Court. Observers say the case underscores deep challenges in family law practice, including ethical obligations.