Court case -Sasfa challenges Safa

2016-05-11 06:00

ON 26 April South African Schools’ Football Association (Sasfa) challenged South African Football Association’s (Safa) decision of 29 March, 2015 and 26 September, 2015, respectively to withdraw its recognition of Sasfa, and to withdraw Safa’s mandate to Sasfa to administer schools’ football in the country. The matter was heard by acting judge, Justice Nkosi.

At the commencement of the hearing, Sasfa withdrew the relief which sought to declare the Safa decisions aforementioned, unlawful. The matter was thus argued only in relation to Sasfa’s claim that the alleged dispute between Sasfa and Safa arising from the aforesaid decisions, be referred to independent arbitration.

In relation to the merits, Safa contended that its statutes authorised it to withdraw its recognition of Sasfa, and to terminate Sasfa’s mandate to administer schools’ football. Safa’s authority to do so was not contested by Sasfa.

Sasfa’s main claim was that there was allegedly an agreement reached prior to the 29 March, 2015 meeting that the matter would be held in abeyance for 21 days.

However, Safa pointed out that Sasfa was represented in the meeting on 29 March, 2015, and that the Sasfa representative did not object to the passing of the resolution, and in fact did not vote against it.

The rationale for Safa taking over the administration of schools’ football is that Sasfa administers schools’ football only for some 3 000 in knock-out competitions, and does not administer schools for the 27 000 throughout the country.

Safa was thus required by the Department of Sport and Recreation SA to take over the running of schools’ football throughout the country.

In relation to the request for arbitration, Safa and Sasfa had agreed to refer the matter to arbitration, but when it came before the independent arbitrator in September 2015, Sasfa objected to the appointment of the arbitrator, insisting that the parties must agree on the name of the arbitrator.

Accordingly, the arbitration did not take place, and Safa’s offer to arbitrate the alleged dispute expired.

In regard to Sasfa’s press release that certain concessions were made by Safa’s counsel during the hearing, Safa rejects these contentions not only because they are inappropriate given that the matter is pending before a court of law, but also because it is entirely incorrect.

Sasfa, in its founding affidavit, had alleged that Safa had “dissolved Sasfa”. What Safa’s counsel pointed out was that Safa had not been dissolved, but had its recognition withdrawn by Safa, and that accordingly Sasfa may continue to exist as an entity.

We wish to point out that Safa’s decisions aforementioned take effect immediately, and that accordingly, since 26 September, 2015, Safa administers all schools’ football.

- Supplied.


Join the conversation! encourages commentary submitted via MyNews24. Contributions of 200 words or more will be considered for publication.

We reserve editorial discretion to decide what will be published.
Read our comments policy for guidelines on contributions.

Inside News24

Traffic Alerts
There are new stories on the homepage. Click here to see them.


Create Profile

Creating your profile will enable you to submit photos and stories to get published on News24.

Please provide a username for your profile page:

This username must be unique, cannot be edited and will be used in the URL to your profile page across the entire network.


Location Settings

News24 allows you to edit the display of certain components based on a location. If you wish to personalise the page based on your preferences, please select a location for each component and click "Submit" in order for the changes to take affect.

Facebook Sign-In

Hi News addict,

Join the News24 Community to be involved in breaking the news.

Log in with Facebook to comment and personalise news, weather and listings.