The University of Johannesburg’s former Senior Director of Student Affairs, Andries Helani, has been ordered to pay the university over R18.18 million after the Labour Court found that he breached his employment contract by helping non-compliant private student accommodation providers secure accreditation.
Labour Court Judge Reynaud Neil Daniels found that Helani accepted bribes and made fraudulent misrepresentations to assist Mahlatse Investments in obtaining accreditation for two properties in Braamfontein.
The university had sued Helani for contractual damages seeking over R18.18 million for money paid to accommodation providers whose properties should not have been accredited.
The court ultimately ordered Helani to pay the full amount, together with the university’s legal costs, including the costs of his unsuccessful applications to amend his pleadings and postpone the trial.
Properties approved for 1,441 beds
Helani served as UJ’s Senior Director for Student Affairs from January 2017 until his dismissal in March 2024. His responsibilities included overseeing the university’s dealings with privately owned student accommodation providers.
The court heard that Mahlatse Investments applied for accreditation for two Braamfontein properties, one in Jorissen Street and another in Bertha Street.
The properties were approved for a combined 1,441 beds, with the Jorissen Street property accredited for 748 beds and the Bertha Street property for 693 beds.
However, a subsequent investigation found that the Jorissen Street property had only 125 beds, while the Bertha Street property had only 174 beds, a combined capacity of 299 beds. The investigation also found incomplete applications, missing compulsory documents and other compliance failures.
University paid more than R17 million
Fundi, which facilitated payments from the university to accredited accommodation providers, paid Mahlatsi Properties and/or Mahlatse Investments R17.09 million between March and October 2022.
The amount excluded Fundi’s six percent fee of R1.09 million, bringing the total amount paid by the university in relation to the two properties to R18.18 million.
The university argued that it received no value for the money because the properties were not compliant and should never have been accredited.
Judge Daniels agreed, finding that the university’s loss was directly linked to Helani’s conduct.
Helani received over R3 million in payments
The judgment records that Helani received hundreds of payments from Mahlatse Investments and other private student accommodation providers.
Between March 2021 and March 2024, he received 366 payments amounting to over R3 million. Among the payments were R30,000 deposited into his account with the reference “Siphiwe K”, R29,000 paid by Mahlatsi Properties towards his son’s school fees and a further R9,000 payment.
A forensic accountant who analysed the relevant bank accounts found that Helani personally received R457,000 from Siphiwe Khoza and Mahlatse-related entities between March and November 2022.
The court was told that there was a significant correlation between payments made by Fundi to the accommodation providers and payments received by Helani. Several payments to Helani occurred within days of Fundi paying the accommodation providers.
Judge rejects explanation for payments
Helani attempted to explain some of the payments by claiming that he had been involved in a property transaction with Khoza and had also borrowed money from him because of financial difficulties.
However, the court found these explanations inadequate.
Helani could not produce a deed of sale or proof that a property he allegedly sold to Khoza had been transferred to either of them. He also failed to provide proof that the alleged loan had been repaid.
The court further found that Helani had failed to disclose his relationships with Khoza, Nkele and entities linked to them, as well as the payments he received from accommodation providers.
Court finds Helani was an active participant
Judge Daniels rejected Helani’s defence that he played only an administrative role in the accreditation process.
The court found that he was a senior manager, a member of the Bid Evaluation Committee and the project leader responsible for the accreditation process. He prepared the report that was submitted to the Tender Committee recommending the accreditation of the two properties.
The Tender Committee relied on his report when approving the properties and was unaware of the irregularities surrounding them.
The court found that Helani represented to the Tender Committee that the applications had been properly evaluated, that the inspections had taken place and that the properties complied with the applicable requirements.
Judge Daniels concluded that these representations were false and that Helani knew, or must have known, that they were false.
Warning signs had already been raised
The court also considered evidence that Helani had been warned about fraudulent activity involving some of the people connected to the accommodation providers.
In September 2021, UJ’s former Manager for Operations and Customer Support, Elmarie Britz, sent Helani a report identifying fraudulent conduct involving bogus leases and invoices.
Despite receiving the report, Helani did not flag Khoza or Nkele when the later accreditation process was conducted. The court found that he knew, or reasonably ought to have known, about their involvement in fraudulent activities.
False inspections exposed
The court also heard evidence that the inspection process itself had been compromised.
UJ security officer Mthetheleli Jafta testified that he had not inspected the two properties, despite his name appearing on inspection documentation. He said colleagues had asked him to write his name on security checklists and that his signature appearing on the documents had been forged.
A subsequent forensic investigation found that the Jorissen Street property could accommodate only 125 beds and the Bertha Street property only 174 beds.
The investigator also found no students at Jorissen Street and only one UJ student at Bertha Street during the later inspection.
Court rejects defence of innocence
Judge Daniels found that the evidence pointed to more than isolated or innocent payments.
The judge said the combination of Helani’s position in the accreditation process, his failure to disclose his financial dealings, his receipt of substantial payments from service providers and the involvement of other employees and students pointed to a coordinated scheme to defraud the university.
The court concluded that Helani was a “willing and active participant” in the scheme and that he knew his representations to the university were false.
R18.18 million damages awarded
The court found that, had Helani not breached his employment contract through the fraudulent misrepresentations, UJ would not have accredited the two properties and would not have lost over R18 million.
Judge Daniels therefore found that the full amount constituted the appropriate measure of damages.
The judge said the evidence demonstrated that Helani accepted bribes to help Mahlatse Investments obtain accreditation despite the company not being entitled to it.
In the final order, Helani was directed to pay the university over R18.18 million for the damages caused by his breach of contract.
He was also ordered to pay the university’s costs of the trial and the costs associated with his unsuccessful applications to amend his pleadings and postpone the trial.
