1
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this
document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy
IN THE COMPANIES TRIBUNAL OF SOUTH AFRICA
CASE NO: CT02654ADJ2026
In the matter between:
MATSHIDZA VHONANI ROLLERT Applicant
And
COMPANIES AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTIES
COMMISSION Respondent
Date of Decision: 26th May 2026
DECISION
INTRODUCTION
1. The Applicant is Matshidza Vhonani Rollert residing at 3[ …] P[…]
Road, The Reeds, Extension 5 Centurian, Gauteng, South Africa.
2. The Respondent is the Companies and Intellectual Properties
Commission resident at DTI Campus 77 Meintjies Street.
3. The Applicant applies to the Companies Tribunal in terms of Section
195(7) of the Companies Act 7 1 of 2008 (“the Companies Act”) questioning
the decision of the Respondent and wanting it to be set aside by the
Tribunal.
2
4. On 18th March 2026, the Applicant filed a complaint against Recast
Enterprise CC with CIPC. CIPC advised that in terms of section 169 (1)(a) of
the Companies Act that it will not investigate the complaint because it
believes the complaint do not allege facts which, if proven, would constitute
grounds for a remedy under the Companies Act. The investigator stated that
after consulting the Directors, Members and Practitioners Unit it concluded
that the requirements for a resignation were satisfied.
5. The Applicant thus brought the matter to the Tribunal. The Applicant
argued that he did not resign and was fraudulently removed as director of
Recast Enterprises CC. He states that he was not interrogated by CIPC and
thus questions the decision made by CIPC.
APPLICABLE LAW
1. Section 195 (7) of the Companies Act states that
“An decision by the Companies Tribunal with respect to a decision, notice or order by the
Commission is binding on the Commission, subject to any review by the court.”
EVALUATION AND FINDINGS
2. The decision by CIPC to dismiss the Applicants request is justified.
CIPC cannot investigate such allegations . Such matters must be referred to
SAPS. It is also unclear what the Appl icant is requesting in his application
3
form. He seems to be asking the Tribunal to make an order for reinst atement
rather then setting aside the CIPC decision. The application is dismissed.
ORDER
3. The application is dismissed.
MOHAMED ALLI CHICKTAY
MEMBER OF THE COMPANIES TRIBUNAL