Former SAA chairperson Dudu Myeni has launched a blistering attack on the judge who declared her a delinquent director for life, arguing that there were many mistakes in the judgment, says a Daily Maverick report.

Advocates Dali Mpofu, Nqabayethu Buthelezi and Noxolo Kekana, on behalf of Myeni, use the phrase the ‘learned judge erred’ 10 times in a heads of argument document dated 25 September as Myeni looks to overturn the ruling issued by Judge Ronel Tolmay in the Gauteng High Court (Pretoria) on 27 May.

They denied that she took personal advantage of information gleaned while an SAA director, harmed the now-bankrupt state airline and engaged in grossly negligent misconduct. Myeni intimated that she would take the appeal process to the Constitutional Court if necessary.

The Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse (Outa) and the SA Airways Pilots’ Association (Saapa), which brought the application to declare Myeni a delinquent director, on 23 June filed a notice of opposition to that appeal.

They also want the judgment enforced pending the outcome of the appeal process.

Outa’s head of legal affairs, Stefanie Fick, reportedly told the DM yesterday that the watchdog was looking forward to arguing about Myeni’s leave to appeal application and Outa’s primary and alternative enforcement applications.

Myeni said the judge had set a ‘crucial precedent’ based on limited jurisprudence by allowing Outa to proceed with the case despite section 162 of the Companies Act specifically excluding public interest litigants from relief.

According to the DM report, Myeni argued that the Companies Act provided for the removal of directors, but did not allow any standing for those acting in the public interest. That she never challenged the standing of Saapa did not resolve the question about whether the judge was correct in granting Outa standing before the court, Myeni said.

The judge in the case Frothingham vs Melon found that the notion of a taxpayer acting in the public interest was an ‘abstract interest’, she said.

‘It would be untenable to contend that every taxpayer had a right to challenge a law as unconstitutional,’ Myeni added.

She also claimed the judge was biased as she had allegedly copied from Outa and Saapa’s legal documents, including at least 265 of the 285 paragraphs of the judgment.

Imposing of the delinquent director for life ruling was harsh, which would permanently impair her livelihood, Myeni said.

According to her, such a sanction was unprecedented and unwarranted in the circumstances. The court ought to grant leave to appeal to the SCA, given the weight and complexity of the grounds of appeal, Myeni said.

In closing, the three advocates on behalf of Myeni said that the court should grant her leave to appeal, dismiss Outa and Saapa’s enforcement application and that the court should block alternative constitutional challenges aimed at enforcing the 27 May ruling.

Full Daily Maverick report