The South African Football Association (SAFA) has secured another legal victory after the Supreme Court of Appeal ruled in its favour in the long-running dispute over the association’s presidential elections held four years ago.
Former SAFA vice-president Ria Ledwaba and football administrator Solly Mohlabeng have repeatedly challenged the election of SAFA president Danny Jordaan in court.
Jordaan was re-elected at the Sandton Convention Centre in June 2022, defeating both Ledwaba and Mohlabeng by a significant margin.
However, the pair have continued to contest the outcome in court. The matter has now been heard six times, with each ruling going in favour of SAFA. In all instances, the courts have also ordered Ledwaba and Mohlabeng to pay legal costs.
Jordaan, who previously served as chief executive of the 2010 FIFA World Cup in South Africa, is expected to go to the polls again later this year and is currently set to run unopposed, with no challengers having publicly declared their intention to contest the position.
Supreme Court of Appeal ruling
In a statement, SAFA confirmed that the Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed the latest attempt by Ledwaba and Mohlabeng to challenge the election outcome.
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL RULING:
1. The South African Football Association (SAFA) welcomes the Supreme Court of Appeal’s judgment dated 13 February 2026 handed down 24 February 2026 in the matter Ria Ledwaba and Solly Mohlabeng v the South African Football Association, where the court dismissed, with costs, Ledwaba and Mohlabeng’s special application for leave to appeal in terms of section 17(2)(f) of the Superior Court’s Act, where they sought the President of the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) to reconsider the Court’s earlier decision to dismiss their application for leave to appeal.
2. The Court dismissed their special application for leave to appeal due to their failure to demonstrate to the Court that a refusal of their special leave to appeal would result in grave injustice or would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.
3. The High Court’s ruling in the same matter, which had become the subject of the dispute before the SCA, unequivocally rejected the continued efforts by Ledwaba and Mohlabeng to disrupt the administration of football in South Africa.
The High Court judgment reinforced the integrity of SAFA’s election processes and served as a clear message against all efforts designed to undermine the Association.
With the recent judgment, the SCA simply upheld the same position.
BACKGOUND OF THE MATTER:
4. In October 2022, after suffering a significant defeat in the SAFA Presidential elections, Ms. Ledwaba and Mr. Mohlabeng sought to overturn the results.
In a bid to pursue their misguided agenda, they launched an Application at the Pretoria division of the High Court, seeking to invalidate and set aside the elections’ outcome.
5. SAFA opposed the application, standing firm in defence of the rights of the SAFA National Executive Committee members who participated in the voting process and further sought to uphold the SAFA Statutes, which govern the election and administration processes.
6. On February 9, 2025, the Pretoria High Court, under Honourable Judge Holland-Muter, ruled that the Applicants no longer held membership or positions of authority within SAFA structures. As such, they had no legal standing to invoke the SAFA Statutes or pursue any disputes under the jurisdiction of SAFA.
The Court accurately dismissed their application with costs, including costs of two (2) Counsels, with one being a Senior Counsel.
7. Undeterred, Ms. Ledwaba and Mr. Mohlabeng filed for leave to appeal on 21 February 2024, citing misinterpretations of the SAFA Statutes and their
submissions.
The leave to appeal was heard on 04 December 2024, and on 05 December 2024, the High Court once again ruled against them, confirming that their appeal lacked reasonable prospects of success.
8. The Court further emphasised that no other court would likely reach a different conclusion, and that there were no compelling circumstances justifying consideration by a higher Court, including that there is important point of law that they raised which justify consideration by a higher Court.
Once again, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs, including costs of a Senior Counsel.
CONCLUSION:
9. This marks the sixth time in just three (3) years that Ledwaba and Mohlabeng have failed in their legal attempts to disrupt the Association. Their repeated court defeats underscore their ongoing attempts to distract SAFA from its commitment to developing football in the country.
10.SAFA remains resolute in its mission to foster the growth of football, promote social cohesion and unite the country through the power of sport.
This judgment reaffirms SAFA’s commitment to develop football in South Africa and safeguarding its governance and administration from unwarranted disruptions.
