South Africa

New BEE rules for the legal sector under fire in South Africa

Trade union Solidarity and top law firms in South Africa are set to challenge new prescribed racial quotas introduced for the local legal sector.

These Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) sector codes, named the Legal Sector Code, were published by Trade Minister Parks Tau in September 2024.  

The Legal Sector Code will impose rigid requirements and transformation targets on the legal profession.

This includes, among others, requirements relating to ownership, management control, skills development, and preferential procurement.

Under the new codes, South African law firms with an annual turnover exceeding R5 million and advocates with a turnover above R3 million must achieve up to 50% black ownership and 50% black representation in management within five years.

In addition, preferential procurement and the briefing of advocates will also increasingly be linked to race-based targets.

In a press statement released on Thursday, 30 April 2026, Solidarity’s legal network organiser, Émil Glas, outlined the organisation’s arguments against the new codes.

Glas argued that these regulations represent a dangerous form of racial intrusion into the legal profession, “where race is increasingly elevated above merit and equal treatment as the decisive criterion”.

He emphasised the potential impact of the new targets on smaller legal practices, claiming they will affect every corner of the legal field and influence the legal process through “transformation ideology”.

“They influence who is appointed, who is promoted, and ultimately who receives which legal representation,” he said.

“Firms come under pressure to brief specific advocates to meet targets, or to make appointments and promotions where race, rather than merit, carries the greatest weight.”

According to Solidarity, these codes could also indirectly affect clients’ freedom of choice, as clients may be confronted with the question of whether appointments are based on merit or race when selecting legal representation.

Solidarity also plans to argue that the codes are unconstitutional and infringe several fundamental rights, including the right to equality, freedom of trade, occupation and profession, and fair labour practices.

“This case is not only about regulations. It is about the future of the legal profession and whether it will remain a space where merit, independence, and fairness prevail,” Glas said.

Solidarity’s case will be heard in the Pretoria High Court on Monday, 4 May, where it will ask the court to review and set aside the decision to issue the sector codes.

The organisation will also ask the court to declare the new codes unlawful, irrational, and unconstitutional. 

Top legal firms also plan to oppose the new codes

On 29 April, Bloomberg reported that some of South Africa’s biggest law firms have also asked the Gauteng High Court to set aside the new codes.

These law firms include Norton Rose Fulbright, which initially brought the legal proceedings to the court, and Bowmans, Webber Wentzel and Werksmans, which have intervened.

The firms plan to argue that the Legal Sector Code is “unlawful” and “unworkable” in its present form.

According to Bloomberg, the firms believe that the revised code removes recognition for several established measures aimed at transformation.

In addition, Bowmans, Webber Wentzel, and Werksmans said the new code “wrongly excludes” black non-lawyers from management control scoring.

This is despite professionals in areas such as human resources, technology and accounting often holding critical senior management and leadership roles in law firms.

The firms have proposed that the government develop a lawful, evidence-based and properly constructed Legal Sector Code.

In the meantime, they suggest that the government should allow generic codes to continue to apply to the legal profession.

The firms said this would avoid any regulatory vacuum while still allowing the sector and government to produce a code that advances transformation.

The legal firms’ case will also be heard between 4 and 8 May.

Newsletter

Top JSE indices

1D
1M
6M
1Y
5Y
MAX
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Comments