Steve in legal spat
2009-04-19 23:42
Johannesburg - Steve Hofmeyr's former lawyer has sued the entertainer for over R200 000.
The summons was issued by the High Court in Pretoria. In response, Hofmeyr has laid formal charges against Peet Viljoen at the Law Society of the Northern Provinces.
Hofmeyr and Viljoen's paths split in a rather unpleasant way last year when Viljoen was representing Hofmeyr in a dispute with Janine van der Vyfer, Hofmeyr's ex-mistress. She had sued Hofmeyr for the alleged non-fulfilment of certain promises he made during their relationship.
What exactly it was that lead to the spat between Hofmeyr and Viljoen was not made clear, but both parties admitted publicly that they want nothing more to do with one another.
'Will fight the charges'
Viljoen confirmed on Sunday that he had sued Hofmeyr for over R200 000 for outstanding payments. Hofmeyr also confirmed that he had received the summons.
"I was surprised to get the summons, especially since Peet has been insisting on representing me on a pro amico basis (on the basis of friendship and thus for free) for the past year.
"I will fight the charges based on that fact," he said.
In response, Viljoen said there was indeed an informal understanding that Hofmeyr would not have to pay for ordinary legal work.
"But when it comes to the real litigation and we have to go to court, as in the case of Van der Vyfer, Steve knew all too well that advocates would be involved and that they need to be paid." The court date has not yet been set.
Knowingly broke the relationship
Beeld has learned that the charges Hofmeyr laid against Viljoen at the Law Society included the charge that Viljoen apparently knowingly broke the confidential relationship between lawyer and client by making confidential information (which Hofmeyr had given to Viljoen in connection with the Van der Vyfer case) available to "certain newspapers".
Viljoen said the Law Society had "not yet officially" informed him about Hofmeyr's charges.
Hester Bezuidenhout, media manager for the Law Society, said these charges amount to "privileged information" and that she could therefore not confirm or deny the charges.