MAJIEDT J contravention of the Proclomation had taken place, as Mr Tsose was in lawful residence on the farm and, therefore, his arrest was unlawful. Schreiner JA said that “just as the best motive will not cure an otherwise illegal arrest so the worst motive will not render an otherwise lawful arrest illegal”.62 [63] Beckenstrater is a case about an alleged malicious prosecution. The Court had to determine whether the plaintiff had made out a case for the relief sought in respect of the alleged malicious prosecution. It held that in order to succeed, the plaintiff had to prove that the prosecution was actuated by an indirect or improper motive and that there was no reasonable or probable cause for instituting the prosecution. Schreiner JA said that— “persons who have reasonable and probable cause for prosecution should not be deterred from setting the criminal law in motion against those whom they believe to have committed offences, even if in doing so they are actuated by indirect and improper motives.”63 [64] Reliance is also placed on Estate Logie.64 There, a sequestration order was allegedly wrongfully obtained. The allegation was premised on the underlying proceedings allegedly having been brought for an ulterior purpose. In rejecting that contention, the Appellate Division relied on the English case, Ex parte Wilbran,65 where it was held that the motive for asserting a legal right is irrelevant. Thus, held the Appellate Division, there was nothing improper in using sequestration proceedings to secure the payment of a debt. [65] Bissett66 concerned an application by the partners in a firm of attorneys for an order striking out an action instituted against them by a bank. The bank claimed 62 Tsose above n 60 at 17G-H. 63 Beckenstrater above n 61 at 135D-E. 64 Estate Logie v Priest 1926 AD 312 at 320-32. 65 Ex parte Wilbran (5 Madd. 1). 66 Bissett v Boland Bank Ltd 1991 (4) SA 603 (D). 29