2.The concept of "gross non-compliance" as implied by the courts, particularly in the context of legal representatives being late to court, is intrinsically linked to the values of the rule of law, respect for court procedures, and efficient administration of justice. This concept emphasises the judiciary's expectation that all parties involved in litigation must scrupulously follow procedural rules and timetables. Failure to do so, especially blatantly or severely, can have serious implications. Concept of Gross Noncompliance: "Gross non-compliance" is defined as a serious and flagrant contempt for legal procedures and court directives. This word denotes a level of neglect or misbehaviour that beyond simple inadvertence or small procedural errors. In the context of the courts, It implies a deliberate or irresponsible failure to comply with procedural rules, which can jeopardise the administration of justice. Theoretical Framework: From a theoretical approach, the concept of gross noncompliance can be examined via the prism of many legal principles:

1. Rule of Law: The notion of the rule of law is fundamental to every legal system, requiring that laws be consistently observed and enforced. Gross noncompliance weakens this notion by permitting parties to violate procedural restrictions with impunity. 2. Judicial Efficiency and Integrity: Courts must uphold their integrity and guarantee that justice is served efficiently. Late appearances or refusal to comply with court orders generate delays in the judicial process, which can harm other parties. 3. Equal before the law: Ensure that all parties are treated equally under the law by holding everyone to the same standards of conduct. Allowing egregious noncompliance by some weakens this premise and may diminish public trust in the legal system. Constitutional Provisions:

The South African Constitution of 1996 has many clauses that apply to the idea of gross noncompliance:

1. Section 1(c) establishes the supremacy of the Constitution and the rule of law as fundamental values. 2. Section 165(4): Ensures the judiciary's independence and requires state agencies to help and safeguard courts in order to maintain their dignity, accessibility, and effectiveness. Relevant Case Law: Courts have addressed the issue of noncompliance with procedural requirements in many cases: 1.Erasmus v Absa Bank Ltd [1997 (4) SA 457 (SCA)]: This case involved a failure to comply with procedural time constraints. The Supreme Court of Appeal emphasised the importance of following court regulations and stated that condonation for non-compliance would not be given lightly, especially if the non-compliance was severe. 2.Nkala v Harmony Gold Mining Co Ltd [2016 (5) SA 240 (GJ)]: In this case, the court exercised its authority to reject a matter for flagrant noncompliance with procedural procedures, emphasising the importance of litigants respecting the court's processes. Residents of Farm Greydel Case: In the Residents of Farm Greydel case, the court mentions legal representation arriving late, which indicates gross noncompliance. Legal representatives are court officers who are responsible for maintaining the judicial process's integrity. Their tardiness can disrupt processes, cause unnecessary delays, and reflect negatively on their professional behaviour. In this setting, gross noncompliance can have a variety of consequences: - Case Dismissal: If the court determines that the delay was significant and unreasonable, the case may be dismissed for lack of prosecution. - expenses Orders: The court may order the party causing the delay to pay the expenses incurred as a result of their noncompliance. - Professional Sanctions: Legal representatives may face disciplinary action from their professional bodies for failing to carry out their duties.

JUST INCLUDE FOOTNOTES AND REFERNCES FOR BIBLOGRAPHY