ought to draw of law into the attention of the Court to relevant or fact which account. would Therefore, otherwise the not have Applicant ought matters been to taken show that there is no intention of repeating arguments already made by the Parties. advance, And such new matter as the Applicant seeks to must be based on the data already laid before the Court, and not fresh evidence; ix) The Applicant ought to show expertise in the field relevant to the matter in dispute, and in this regard, general expertise in law does not suffice; x) Whereas consent of the Parties, to proposed amicus factor to be taken into consideration, role, is a it is not the determining factor. 23. We are persuaded determining necessary past the to address to be participation General’s the present Motion is biased, adjudicated as above guidelines and the issue whether pronouncements matters 24. On that amicus in curiae has the we useful in further deem it the Applicant taken a Reference, would are by fact of position and prejucdice on the whether its the Attorney case. that issue, the Constitutional Certain Amicus Others vs. Curiae Treatment Court of Applications; Action South Africa in Re: Minister Campaign and of Health Others and (CCT 8 /02)[2002] had this to say: ‘The role of an amicus is to draw relevant and fact to which matters of law the attention of the Court to attention would not APPLICATIONS No.3 OF 2015 Page 10