A former University of Johannesburg (UJ) senior administrator, Mzwakhe Matukane is set to receive his pension despite the university’s attempt to keep it frozen while pursuing damages against him in the Labour Court in Johannesburg.
The shift follows a September 15 decision by the UJ Pension Fund board that the legal requirements for continued withholding had not been met.
Shepstone & Wylie attorney Carlyle Field, acting for the fund, confirmed the decision in a September 23 letter to Piet Tibane of Morakile Tibane Attorneys, who represents Matukane.
Field said the board considered Tibane’s September 1 correspondence and Matukane’s Labour Court response before it “resolved to release your client’s pension benefit”.
READ MORE: Who lost the R18.2m? Ex-UJ employee appeals NSFAS damages order
Administrative steps remained. Once Matukane submits the required claim forms and documents, “payment will be made within ten (10) days”, under the fund’s agreement with its administrator.
UJ, through its attorneys Edward Nathan Sonnenbergs (ENS), asked the fund to explain why it had decided to release the money.
Field responded on September 29 in a letter sent to ENS, for UJ, and Morakile Tibane Attorneys, for Matukane – whose job title was senior director in revenue administration.
The dispute turns on section 37D(1)(b) of the Pension Funds Act and Fund Rule 11.2.
The legal hurdle
UJ had cleared several hurdles. It had instituted a damages claim in the Johannesburg Labour Court; the amount claimed exceeded Matukane’s pension benefit, and UJ had not delayed in pursuing the case.
The remaining question was whether UJ had established a prima facie case involving theft, fraud or dishonest misconduct and had a reasonable chance of succeeding.
The fund decided it had not.
Some allegations involve Matukane’s alleged “failure to implement systems or undertake proper due diligence” and to “prevent fraudulent activities perpetrated by members of his team”.
The fund said those allegations could still support damages for negligence or gross negligence. But without an underlying element of theft, fraud or dishonesty, they did not satisfy the narrower pension-withholding test.
READ MORE: Appeal looms as ex-UJ official told to repay R18m in student aid case
It cited the High Court’s Windybrow Centre for the Arts judgment for that distinction.
Another allegation went further.
UJ alleged Matukane deliberately authorised accommodation payments through Hahnemann Homeopathics to circumvent a payment block affecting Mahlatse Investments and route money to Siphiwe Khoza.
The fund said this amounted, “at face value”, to a prima facie case of theft, fraud or dishonest misconduct.
But Matukane produced counter-evidence.
Counter-evidence changes the picture
The board found he had raised concerns about Mahlatse Investments and argued it made little sense for him to bypass a payment block he had helped establish. Correspondence also showed he had engaged other senior UJ representatives over the Hahnemann payments.
The fund said this cast “serious doubt” and a “serious challenge” to UJ’s prima facie case.
It cited the Supreme Court of Appeal’s Highveld Steel judgement and the Gauteng High Court’s Hansen + Genwest decision for the principle that a benefit need not remain withheld where an employer’s prima facie case faces such a challenge.
UJ also relied on an anonymous whistleblower report alleging Matukane received R200,000 from Khoza in December 2022 to help resolve Mahlatse’s non-payment problem.
READ MORE: Private landlords in deep debt due to UJ pay delays
The fund said that allegation did not reconcile with evidence showing Matukane warning about Mahlatse during the same period.
It also considered alleged unexplained income and Matukane’s withdrawal from a lifestyle audit. The fund said he had opened at least 19 bank and investment accounts to investigators, who found no clear service-provider payments.
The September 23 letter also recorded a board dispute.
Field told Tibane that trustee Nolwazi Morarare had voluntarily recused herself because she was mentioned in the Labour Court pleadings, while the remaining trustees were not conflicted and the relevant meetings were quorate.
UJ’s damages case remains before the Labour Court. The pension payout process continues.
- The University of Johannesburg (UJ) Pension Fund board decided on September 15 to release former senior administrator Mzwakhe Matukane’s pension, finding legal requirements to withhold it unmet.
- Matukane must submit the required claim forms and documents for his pension to be paid within ten days, according to the fund’s agreement with its administrator.
- UJ had instituted a damages claim in the Johannesburg Labour Court, alleging Matukane’s involvement in theft, fraud, or dishonest misconduct, but the pension fund found insufficient prima facie evidence for withholding the pension.
- Allegations against Matukane included failure to implement proper due diligence, routing payments through entities to circumvent payment blocks, and receiving R200,000 from Siphiwe Khoza; however, counter-evidence raised serious doubts about these claims.
- Trustee Nolwazi Morarare recused herself from pension fund board meetings due to conflict of interest, but the remaining trustees, deemed not conflicted, proceeded with decisions; UJ's damages case is ongoing in the Labour Court.
