lA Ne TE Abe jx]
\e\ 7 if)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
CASE NO: 2025-097167
(1) REPORTABLE: NO
(2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO
(3) REVISED: NO
ae.
DATE SIGNATURE
In the matter between: -
HIGHLANDS PARK FOOTBALL CLUB Applicant
and
SOUTH AFRICAN FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION 1* Respondent
ADV TSHIFHIWA TSHITEREKE N.O 2° Respondent
NB LA MASIA FOTTBAL CLUB 3'° Respondent
GAUTENG FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION 4” Respondent
GOMORA UNITED FOOTBALL CLUB 5" Respondent
ZIZWE UNITED FOOTBALL CLUB 6" Respondent
HANOVER PARK FOOTBALL CLUB 7" Respondent
MIDLANDS WANDERERS FOOTBALL CLUB 8" Respondent
AFRICAN WARRIORS FOOTBALL CLUB 9" Respondent
THAMES FOOTBALL CLUB 10" Respondent
1
NAAS THE BEES FOOTBALL CLUB 11" Respondent
AMAVARRA FOOTBALL CLUB 12" Respondent
FC RAVENS FOOTBALL CLUB 13" Respondent
SINENKANI FOOTBALL CLUB 14" Respondent
MATTA MILAN FOOTBALL CLUB 15" Respondent
SUNRISE FOOTBALL CLUB 16" Respondent
KAKAMAS JUVENTUS FOOTBALL CLUB 17" Respondent
JBM FOOTBALL CLUB 18" Respondent
JUDGMENT
MFENYANA J
Background
(1] This is an urgent review application. The applicant, Highlands Park, a football club
participating among others, in the Gauteng ABC Motsepe League, seeks to review and
set aside an arbitration award issued by Adv Tshifhiwa Tshitereke (the arbitrator) on 19
June 2025, with reasons provided on 27 June 2025.
[2] On 19 June 2025, the arbitrator, acting under the auspices of the South African
Football Association (SAFA) upheld a referral by the third respondent, NB La Masia
Football Club (La Masia) and found that the fielding of a player known as Chigaemezu
Franklin Ogbonna (Mr Ogbonna) by Highlands Park was a violation of rule 11.1 read with
Rule 12.5 of the SAFA Uniform Rules. The arbitrator ordered that Highlands Park should
forfeit all points in which Mr Ogbonna had participated during the ABC Motsepe League-
2
Gauteng, for the 2024/2025 season, in violation of the above rules.
[3] The application is styled as Parts A and B. Part A was disposed of on 30 June 2025,
in a judgment by Fisher J when the learned judge struck the matter off the roll on the
basis that it was not properly and urgently prosecuted by the applicant.
Urgency
[4] The matter returns to this court for the hearing of the second part of the relief (Part
B), on the same papers, accordingly supplemented by the applicant. Part B was initially
set down for hearing on 22 July 2025 before Mahosi J who removed the matter from the
roll as the learned judge was not satisfied with the issue of service. | was not pointed to
any order made by Mahosi J, however | accept this to be so as both parties are of the
same understanding.
[5] The applicant contends that despite the striking off of Part A, the matter remains
urgent as the season commences on 11 August 2025, and the relief sought would be
rendered moot if the matter were to be heard at a later date. This is the same reason
advanced in the founding papers when the matter was to be heard on 22 July 2025. The
applicant’s explanation in this regard is that the commencement date was shifted from
the initial starting date of 1 August 2025 to 11 August 2025. This was apparently partially
due to an application instituted by the fourteenth and seventeenth respondents against
some of the respondents in the present matter, in the Eastern Cape Division of the High
Court in Makhanda, application to be heard on 5 and 6 August 2025. Mr Manca,
3