REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
> , ets, S \
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA,
GAUTENG DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
CASE NO: 2025-076955
| (1) REPORTABLE: YES
@) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES:€E5)
Ni
(3) REVIEWED: (ENO
—_ —
DATE
In the matter between:
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES’ PENSION FUND First Applicant
AKANI RETIREMENT FUND ADMINISTRATORS Second Applicant
(Pty) Ltd
ZAMANI ERNEST EPHRAIM LETJANE Third Applicant
PETER MODIKE Fourth Applicant
PHILLIP MMAMPOU LEBELLO Fifth Applicant
Sixth Applicant
MPHO WILMOT KHAUOE —
Seventh Applicant
EDGAR MAGEZA
Eighth Applicant
THATO MAZANGWANA
2
THULI LYDIA HAPPY MLANGENI Ninth Applicant
LEBOGANG STEPHEN MAREKWA Toa
Eleventh icant
BOITSHOKO DONALD SMOUS fe
SELAELO KGOMOMMU Twelfth Applicant
MANDLA NTULI Thirteenth Applicant
And
PHUMUDZO FARANANI NDOU First Respondent
NDOU ATTORNEYS INC Second Respondent
JUDGMENT
Raubenheimer AJ:
Order
[1] In this matter I made the following order on 11 June 2025:
1, The applicants are granted condonation for non-compliance with the
Uniform Rules of Court relating to forms, service and time periods, and it
is directed that this application be enrolled and heard on an urgent basis
under Rule 6(12).
2. Pending the final determination of action proceedings to be launched by
the applicants against the respondents within 30 days of this Order, the
respondents are interdicted:
7 eee i
3
2.1 From making, publishing, encouraging, repeating or facilitating the
publication or making of, any defamatory and/or injurious statements
as made by the respondents in (1) the eNCA interview (as defined
and described at paragraphs 11, 56 and 57 of the founding affidavit);
(2) the municipal meetings (as described at paragraphs 40 and 60 to
66 of the founding affidavit); and/or the Ndou petition(‘the petition’)
described in paragraphs 7 to 11.3.6 of the supplementary founding
affidavit), including statements accusing or alleging that any of the
applicants:
2.1.1 are (or have been found to be) criminals, thugs, rogue entities
or corrupt;
2.1.2 have “captured” the first applicant (‘the MEPF*), the Board of
the MEPF, or the Financial Sector Conduct Authority; or
2.1.3 have misappropriated funds from the MEPF, stripped it of
assets or engaged in fraudulent conduct in relation to MEPF
properties;
2.1.4 any statements about any of the applicants which aro
substantially similar to those listed 2.1.1 to 2.1.3 above.
2.2 to desist from canvassing any work from members of the MEPF
on the basis of the statements as set out in 2.1 above.
3. The respondents are ordered, within 2 (two) days of this Order. to:
3.1 publish a notice on the respondents’ social media accounts
that the Order has been granted;
3.2 withdraw the petition; and
3.3 alert and inform the respondents’ clients who are members of
the MEPF that the Order has been granted.
4. The respondents are ordered to pay the costs of this application,
including the costs of two counsel.
2 The applicant requested reasons for the order on 12 June 2025, The
reasons for the order follow below.
Introduction