Businessman Sipho Pityana's legal tussle against the SA Reserve Bank's Prudential Authority over its decision not to give him the green light to be appointed Absa board chairperson is now heading to the Supreme Court of Appeal.
Image: Simphiwe Mbokazi / Independent Newspapers
The legal battle between SA Reserve Bank’s Prudential Authority and businessman Sipho Pityana is heading to the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) after the central bank was granted leave to appeal.
Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, Judge Luleka Flatela granted the authority leave to appeal at the SCA last month.
The Prudential Authority’s appeal followed Judge Flatela’s June 2025 ruling in which she declared that the authority acted unlawfully and in excess of its powers in terms of the Banks Act by engaging in an informal process with the Absa Group and Absa in connection with Pityana’s nomination as chairperson of the bank’s board of directors, and in particular by notifying Absa of its objection, alternative intention to object to his nomination.
In addition, the judge ordered the Prudential Authority and Absa to pay Pityana's costs, including the costs of two counsel.
“I am persuaded that the appeal has a reasonable prospect of success; another court would come to a different conclusion. Therefore, leave to appeal is granted in terms of Section 17(1)(a)(i) and (ii) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013,” reads Judge Flatela’s judgment.
The Act states that leave to appeal may only be granted where the judge or judges concerned believe that the appeal would have a reasonable prospect of success or there is some other compelling reason why the appeal should be heard, including conflicting judgments on the matter under consideration.
Pityana approached the High Court to seek a declaratory order against the authority as a precursor to taking further actions against it, including a potential claim for damages as a consequence of its unlawful conduct.
The Absa board’s succession committee initially recommended Pityana as its preferred internal candidate to chair the financial institution’s board.
In December 2020, the board members were invited to make themselves available for the position while Pityana was still serving as AngloGold Ashanti board chairperson.
During the recruitment process, he revealed to Absa that he might resign from the mining company due to divisions on the board.
He also revealed that there was a sexual misconduct complaint against him, which was under investigation at the time.
Absa’s board agreed that the internal candidate (Pityana) must be favoured over the external candidate as this would promote continuity in leadership while awaiting his further verification.
The firm tasked with the candidate search sought a reference for Pityana from AngloGold Ashanti, which responded by confirming his tenure with the company.
In August 2021, the succession subcommittee convened and resolved not to support Pityana’s nomination as chairperson of the Absa board, and he was informed of the Prudential Authority's views regarding the entire sexual harassment saga.
Absa had also expressed concerns that the sexual misconduct allegation and the existence of a final report posed a potential reputational issue for the bank.
He later successfully sought the intervention of the High Court, which ruled in his favour in June last year.
loyiso.sidimba@inl.co.za