- A Full Bench overturned an order allowing CFO Dorothy Diale to return to work pending appeal.
- The court found the municipality had a strong arguable appeal and that Diale did not meet the strict section 18 test.
- Judges ruled she could not rely on delays that arose from her own procedural conduct.
The Full Bench of the High Court in Polokwane has ruled that Lepelle-Nkumpi Local Municipality Chief Financial Officer Dorothy Sekgololo Diale cannot return to work while the municipality challenges an earlier judgment declaring her suspension unlawful.
Judge J Kganyago, with Judge M Naude-Odendaal and Acting Judge EJ Burnett concurring, upheld the municipality’s appeal and set aside an order that allowed Diale to resume her duties before the appeal is decided.
How the dispute began
Diale was suspended with full pay on 25 November 2025 while the municipality investigated allegations including dishonesty, fraud, financial management violations, dereliction of duty, and political interference. She later received a charge sheet containing 20 disciplinary charges.
The disciplinary hearing was scheduled to begin before the three-month suspension period expired. On the first hearing date, Diale applied to be represented by a person who was not an attorney, fellow employee, or trade union representative, leading to a postponement while the chairperson considered the application. A second postponement followed after Diale challenged the hearing venue at SALGA’s offices in Polokwane.
After the three-month period expired, Diale argued that her suspension had automatically lapsed and reported for duty. The municipality refused her return, prompting her successful court application declaring the suspension unlawful.
Why she went back to court
When the municipality applied for leave to appeal, Diale brought a separate application under Section 18 of the Superior Courts Act to enforce the judgment immediately.
She argued that remaining on suspension would cause irreparable harm because she would lose the opportunity to qualify for a performance bonus and jeopardise the renewal of her performance agreement.
The municipality opposed the application, saying the alleged harm was speculative and that her return could interfere with witnesses in the ongoing disciplinary process.
Court rejects the section 18 application
Judge Kganyago said Section 18 sets a high legal threshold and requires proof of exceptional circumstances, irreparable harm to the applicant, and no irreparable harm to the other party.
“The test for the granting of a suspension of an order under section 18 is stringent,” the judge wrote. The court found Diale had failed to satisfy those requirements.
Delays blamed on Diale
A key issue was whether the municipality or Diale caused the disciplinary hearing to miss the three-month deadline. The court found the municipality was ready to proceed, but the hearing was delayed by Diale’s procedural decisions.
“The postponement was caused by Dorothy for bringing a representative whose credentials were subject to a challenge,” Judge Kganyago said. The judges also noted that Diale waited until the hearing date to object to the change of venue, despite receiving advance notice.
The judgment concluded that this was “a well-calculated move to drag the hearing beyond the three months” and held that she could not benefit from delays the court found she had engineered.
The order
The Full Bench upheld the municipality’s appeal with costs, including the costs of two counsel.
It replaced the earlier order with one dismissing Diale’s application to return to work while the municipality’s appeal continues.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
