The Polokwane High Court has dismissed an urgent application by former co-host of Thobela FM’s Ditlalemeso morning drive show, Taemane “Lenny T” Phahlane (Legodi), to bar the SABC from employing his replacement in the prime time slot and reinstate him instead.
In the hearing, which was heard on Wednesday, the court found that Phahlane’s application was not urgent and dismissed it with costs. Although dismissal of Phahlane’s urgent application was not a pyrrhic victory for the SABC, it is a reprieve for the corporation. This is because Phahlane has now decided to take the matter to a normal court to challenge
his dismissal.
Phahlane declined to comment and referred us to his lawyers, Makola Matsimela Incorporate, who could not be reached for comment at the time of going to print.
Last month, the station’s controversial mandarins denied Phahlane access to the SABC building in Polokwane shortly after he had signed a contract for his services as co-host of the show with Lethabo “Lee Joy” Mathatho.
This sparked a public outcry, with a group of Thobela FM listeners marching to the SABC, demanding the reinstatement of the talented Phahlane, and accusing the station’s bosses of running the Sepedi station like their own personal fiefdom, practising shotgun management and killing the goose that lays the golden egg.
The march was followed by an ANCYL protest against the SABC on Friday.
In the court papers, which we have seen, Phahlane said he had signed a contract with the SABC on March 31 to present the morning show without finalising his payment rate.
The contract, he said, was to run until March 31 next year. He added that the SABC has not at any stage accused him of breaching that contract.
He said that on April 3, he went to work but was prevented from doing so.
“I was surprised because the contract obligated me to be present every morning,” he said.
Phahlane said when he made enquiries with the SABC about the reasons for barring him from entering the premises, the corporation’s mandarins clutched at straws.
He said he later approached his lawyers, who sent a letter to the SABC on April 8.
Phahlane further stated that on April 11, the SABC wrote to his lawyers, stating that their offer had been revoked. “But the revocation has never been communicated to me, or that the offer of 31 March had a condition that it must be accepted on March 31.
The SABC, after receipt of my signed acceptance, never challenged the validity of the [contract] by virtue of their acceptance and absence of a clear revocation as of the date of April 2, 2025, or a condition antecedent March 31, 2025, offer; the SABC is bound,” he said.
Phahlane said the SABC’s claim that the offer was not signed by March 1, 2025, and therefore invalid, or that there was revocation, was wrong at every conceivable level.
“I respectfully submit that it is a red herring because the decision to revoke the contract was taken after April 2 2025, having signed the contract and the contract having a binding effect.”
Phahlane said the revocation claim was brought to his attention for the first time by the legal representatives of the SABC.
He challenged the SABC to produce emails to support its claims, a demonstrable lie.
