The law firm representing disgruntled members of the Municipal Employees Pension Fund (MEPF) has been slapped with a contempt of court ruling.
Ndou Attorneys is representing some members of the fund who have accused its administrator, Akani Retirement Fund Administrators, of mismanaging their pensions and lacking in governance, transparency, and accountability.
MEPF, which controls about R26-billion in pension funds for the municipal workers, had filed another urgent application arguing that Ndou Attorneys had defied a previous court finding that forbade the firm from making the allegations.
Disparaging and defamatory remarks
In the first judgment on June 11, the Johannesburg High Court granted Akani and MEPF an interdict against Ndou Attorneys and its founder, Phumudzo Ndou.
The Johannesburg High Court ordered the law firm to cease making “defamatory and injurious statements” against the fund and its administrator.
Acting Judge Ettian Raubenheimer ruled that Ndou and his law firm should “cease and desist” from making any disparaging and defamatory remarks about Akani and the MEPF, including calling the company and the fund “thugs, criminals, rogue entities, and corrupt”.
He ordered the firm to publish a notice on all its social media accounts acknowledging the order, withdraw the petition in which the offending statements were made, and draw the attention of its clients to the finding.
Raubenheimer stated that the firm should honour all his instructions in the order. However, the law firm failed to remove the petition, despite later doing so.
The MEPF and Akani immediately approached the court to argue that the firm was in contempt.
Wilful contempt of the court order
Vlad Movshovich, representing Akani and MEPF, sent a letter to Ndou Attorneys, stating: “Your clients have deliberately and brazenly violated the order for at least a week, with the intention of causing maximum harm to our clients, despite the urgency of securing the order.”
“They have continued with this unlawful conduct even after supposed compliance with the order,” said Vlad Movshovich for Akani and MEPF.
Movshovid added: “Our clients do not accept that — given belated compliance, facing imprisonment — all that remains for determination is costs. In any event … costs of the contempt application have nothing to do with the action.
“They are the product of the respondents’ contemptuous and contumelious actions pursuant to the order.”
On June 25, Raubenheimer ruled that the late removal of the petition put Ndou Attorneys in contempt.
“It is declared that the respondents were in breach and wilful contempt of the order granted, dated 11 June 2025, for the period 14 to 24 [June],” reads the judgment.
