Capacity: Attorney of the High Court
Date of Admission / Appointment: Attorney (2001)
Further Appointments: Managing Director (2006)
Gender: Female
Ethnicity: Black
Date of Birth: June 1974
Qualifications: B Proc (1996) LLB (1998)(University of Limpopo), Advanced Diploma in Project Management (2008)(Cranefield College)
Key judgments:
- Lombard v Mcdonalds Wingtip (38117/2020) [2022] ZAGPPHC 1012 (14 November 2022)
- Tavrida Electric Africa (Pty) Ltd v Eskom Holdings SOC (Ltd) and Others (61801/2019) [2021] ZAGPPHC 771 (9 November 2021)
- Nedbank Limited v Louw (2382/2017) [2018] ZANCHC 40 (22 June 2018)
- Matlhatse Trading Enterprises CC v Noko Powerlines CC and Another (49317/2007) [2008] ZAGPPHC 1 (12 December 2008)
Candidate Biography | Updated August 2025:
Livhuwani Vuma is an attorney and the Managing Director of Livhu Matodzi Attorneys Inc.
Most candidates follow a predictable path from articles to advocacy to appointment, but Miss Vuma took the scenic route through South Africa’s regulatory landscape, refereeing disputes between both hardened criminals and temperamental architects.
Vuma qualified as an attorney in 2001, after completing her law degree and articles, where she was exposed to civil and criminal litigation, personal injury claims, deceased estates, and trial appearances.
These formative years gave her a grounding across diverse areas of practice, ones she would constantly rely on. Upon admission, she went on to extend her practice into administrative law and immigration issues such as spousal visas. Her work frequently intersected with sensitive personal and social contexts, including dealing with matters related to the registration of customary marriages after the death of a spouse.
By 2006, Vuma had accumulated sufficient breadth of experience to take a leap that many hesitate to make. Vuma opened her own law firm, Livhu Matodzi Attorneys Inc.
At the same time, stepping into the public regulatory space with the Council for the Built Environment (CBE), first as a consultant and later as its inaugural Regulations Manager.
Vuma, clearly not being one to shy away from a challenge, established the CBE’s legal department and drafted appeal manuals for its six professional councils, shaping policy and operational standards under the CBE Act 43 of 2000. As the de facto Appeals Committee member, she carried significant responsibility in setting the foundation.
Despite her impact, there seemed to still be an itch that she could not shake off, her attachment to the courtroom.
By 2007, she returned fully to private practice, determined to remain in the air of open court. Despite prioritising practice, Vuma consistently accepted roles in professional regulation. From 2008 to 2014, she chaired misconduct hearings at the Engineering Council of South Africa (ECSA), later she did the same at the South African Council for the Architectural Profession (SACAP), and from 2013 to 2018 served as Chairperson of the CBE, where she went on hearing appeals from across the professional councils.
In many ways, these forums became a training ground for the judicial temperament she was building, brick by brick, as those in the Built environment would say.
From 2014, even as she remained active in the professional regulation space, she began with acting appointments in the Magistrates’ Court and soon progressed to the High Court. Between 2017 and 2024, she amassed 93 weeks of acting service in the Gauteng Division and 31 weeks in the Northern Cape Division.
Vuma, having acted and produced judgments during her time at the High Court, and having served on the Audit Committee of the Department of Justice and Correctional Services in 2016, combines judicial exposure with governance experience.
In Tavrida Electric Africa (Pty) Ltd v Eskom Holdings Soc (Ltd) and Others, she considered the review of Eskom’s tender award. Distinguishing between “reasons” and “irregularities,” she rejected a narrow interpretation that would allow indefinite delays, ultimately upholding Eskom’s preliminary point and dismissing the untimely application.
In Lombard v McDonald’s Wingtip, she assessed liability in a slip-and-fall case, carefully weighing evidence and applying consumer protection principles to conclude that the claimant had not proved negligence, and that the disclaimer notice was enforceable.
These judgments stand to illustrate the breadth of Vuma’s judicial experience, from complex administrative and regulatory disputes to civil claims.
It remains a curious question whether the JSC, when considering a career marked by range and resilience, one that has carried the weight of court files and litigation, audit committee reports, regulatory leadership, running her own firm, and even school board responsibilities, will see the High Court as the destination her journey has long been leading toward.
October 2025 Interview
The Judicial Service Commission interviewed candidates for eight vacancies in the Gauteng Division of the High Court. Following deliberations, the Commission had resolved to recommend Ms Livhuwani Betty Vuma for the position.
Ms Livhuwani Betty Vuma’s interview was successful.