Former chairperson of KwaZulu-Natal Ingonyama Trust Board, Sipho Ngwenya, has been dismissed by the Pietermaritzburg High Court in his appeal after failing to file affidavits on time.
Image: File
The Pietermaritzburg High Court has again rejected former chairperson of the Ingonyama Trust Board (ITB), Sipho Jerome Ngwenya, in his attempt to appeal a July 2025 order.
This order requires Ngwenya, a former judge, to account for the disappearance of R30 million belonging to the Ingonyama Trust during his time as the chairperson.
The missing R30 million was the proceeds from the Ingonyama Trust’s sale of land in Hammarsdale to eThekwini Municipality in June 2018. Ngwenya had instructed that these funds be transferred to the trust account of his lawyer, Jafta Incorporated.
The same court previously ruled in 2025 that Ngwenya had moved the money without the ITB’s authorisation. While his assets have been attached to recover the funds, Ngwenya is appealing that specific decision separately.
The current matter concerned Ngwenya’s application for condonation for the late filing of his appeal and affidavits. Following the July 2025 order, Ngwenya was given five days to file affidavits, but failed to do so and subsequently failed to appeal the decision within the required timeframe.
Ngwenya’s legal team cited technical email issues preventing them from receiving Acting Judge Jennifer Marion’s reasons for the order, which they claim resulted in them filing their appeal three months later.
They also suggested that difficulty accessing the court file contributed to the delay. Ngwenya’s instructing attorney, Lwazi Mnguni, stated in an affidavit: “The delay was not due to neglect or indifference, but rather the result of circumstances entirely beyond our control.”
Advocate Colin Pammenter SC, representing Ngwenya, conceded that their reasons for the delays were not perfect but argued that the appeal had prospects of success.
He also challenged the mandate of Strauss Daly Attorneys, the law firm representing the ITB, stating there were reasonable prospects that they had not satisfied the court of their authority to act.
“This (July) order can only be made after being satisfied that Strauss Daly can act,” Pammenter argued.
Conversely, Advocate Credo Mlaba, instructed by Strauss Daly Attorneys, argued that the leave to appeal was hopelessly out of time and that the order was not appealable.
He maintained that Strauss Daly had satisfied the court of their authority to act on behalf of the ITB, suggesting Ngwenya’s challenge was a tactic to avoid explaining the money he syphoned out of the public purse.
“They served condonation late - no apology. But this is how they have been behaving,” he said, criticising the former judge and his legal team.
Acting Judge Marion sided with Mlaba, noting a consistent pattern of delays in the matter.
She stated that she provided her reasons on July 23, 2025, and emphasised the obligation to explain every period of delay.
She pointed out that no steps were taken to inform the registrar about the email issue, and a proper explanation for the duration of the email problem was not provided.
Acting Judge Marion concluded that the “prospects of success were not strong” enough to overlook the delay. Consequently, she dismissed both Ngwenya’s application for condonation and his appeal, with costs.
nomonde.zondi@inl.co.za