A High Court ruling against the Newcastle Local Municipality and a Public Protector report into a R1.1 million payment have given former ActionSA Chief Whip Faizel Cassim reason to state that his name has been cleared.
However, the matter is not as simple as one legal outcome bringing an end to a deeply contested political saga.
While the Pietermaritzburg High Court has found that the municipality’s previous administration acted wrongfully when it pursued an urgent interdict that effectively shut down Cassim’s businesses, and while the Public Protector found no improper conduct, maladministration or abuse of power in respect of payments made to his company, ActionSA insists that these findings do not address the central reason Cassim was expelled from the party.
Responding to Newcastillian News, ActionSA National Chairperson Michael Beaumont said the issue was never whether Cassim had the right to sue the municipality.
Instead, he explained that the party’s concern centred on Cassim’s alleged failure to properly manage a conflict of interest while holding senior political office within the very municipality that later entered into a settlement with his company.
This distinction is important, particularly as several reports have framed the latest developments as a straightforward clearing of Cassim’s name.
Newcastillian News therefore approached both Cassim and ActionSA to establish the full picture behind the court ruling, the Public Protector’s findings, and the political dispute that remains unresolved.
The legal matter dates back to October 2021, when the Newcastle Local Municipality, under then Mayor Dr Nthuthuko Mahlaba, accused Cassim of contaminating the Amcor Dam and surrounding water sources through his laundromat operations in the Riverside Industrial Area.
At the time, the municipality also alleged that Cassim had positioned himself as a whistleblower on local water quality to advance his mayoral ambitions.
Acting on those allegations, the municipality moved to halt Cassim’s operations, resulting in his businesses being unable to operate for more than two years.
More than two years later, the Pietermaritzburg High Court has now delivered a firm legal finding against the Newcastle Local Municipality.
The court found that the municipality acted wrongfully and in breach of its duty of care when it initiated and persisted with an urgent interdict, under case number 8610/2021P, against Newcastle Industrial Launders CC and R.F. Screen Printers (Pty) Ltd.
The court found that the interdict, which prevented the discharge of industrial effluent and led to the termination of water supply, was maintained for more than 16 months, from 6 October 2021 until its withdrawal on 7 March 2023, without evidentiary support for claims that the effluent posed a risk to the environment.
As a result, the municipality was held delictually liable for the losses suffered by Cassim and his wife, Razia. The court accepted that the interdict had the practical effect of shutting down their industrial operations in the Riverside Industrial Area, where access to municipal services was necessary for the businesses to function.
The harm suffered was found to include pure economic loss, including lost revenue and the inability to meet salary obligations.
The municipality was also ordered to cover the plaintiffs’ legal costs on Scale C, including the costs of senior counsel and expert witnesses, namely Mr Kevin Mumsamy, Mr Jacobus Johannes du Plessis, Mr Juan Fedder, and Mr Cassim Azeez.
See the judgment below:
Speaking to Newcastillian News, Cassim said the findings brought a sense of relief after what he described as a painful and damaging ordeal.
“This saga has been tough on us, we had to remove our daughter from school as the accusations against me were affecting her school life, and it impacted my health, seeing me spend four months in hospital. So, the findings from the Public Protector and the High Court ruling come as a relief, as we can now hold our heads high again, after having to go through this all,” he said.
Running parallel to the court proceedings was an investigation by the Public Protector into a payment of R1,137,663.36 made by the Newcastle Local Municipality towards costs linked to Cassim’s company, Newcastle Industrial Launders.
The report, issued by Advocate Kholeka Gcaleka, found no improper conduct, maladministration or abuse of power in respect of the payments made to Cassim’s company by the municipality between April 2023 and June 2023.
The Public Protector’s investigation found that the municipality entered into the agreement on 6 April 2023. The amount was not limited to legal fees, but also included travel expenses for several trips between Newcastle, Pietermaritzburg and Durban, water testing costs, the hire of a water truck valued at R640,000, and legal costs totalling R440,832.56.
The payments were made in three equal instalments on 6 April 2023, 9 May 2023, and 7 June 2023.
For Cassim, the Public Protector’s findings marked another important turning point.
“What hurt me, was that I did as much as I could for the community, and it was upsetting that despite me assuring everyone I was innocent, many opted to listen to the false allegations. However, now that our names have been cleared, we can now hold our heads up again,” he said.
However, while Cassim views the High Court ruling and Public Protector report as vindication, ActionSA maintains that the latest findings do not disturb the basis on which it expelled him from the party in November 2024.
Discussing Cassim’s expulsion at the time, Beaumont said the decision followed an extensive internal investigation by ActionSA’s Senate. The party’s charges included failure to declare a conflict of interest and allegations that Cassim had used his position to advance personal interests.
In explaining the party’s position at the time, Beaumont stated:
“The charges relate to ongoing litigation between Mr Cassim’s company and the Newcastle Local Municipality arising from the actions of the previous ANC-led administration shutting down his place of business for approximately 18 months because of what was believed to be politically motivated actions. In the wake of these events, Mr Cassim pursued legal action against the municipality, which ActionSA acknowledges is his right in a constitutional democracy.”
However, Beaumont stressed that the litigation itself was not the central issue for ActionSA.
Rather, the party’s concern was that Cassim allegedly failed to declare and manage a conflict of interest while serving in senior roles within both the municipality’s Executive Committee and ActionSA’s caucus leadership.
According to ActionSA, this raised concerns about governance and accountability, particularly amid allegations that Cassim sought to influence the resolution of his own legal dispute with the municipality.
Click here to read Newcastillian News’ previous report on Cassim’s expulsion from ActionSA.
As part of the Public Protector’s investigation, the office sought clarity from Beaumont on three occasions, namely 24 November 2024, 11 December 2024, and 10 February 2025.
However, Beaumont later told Newcastillian News that ActionSA was not formally engaged in the investigation and was not afforded an opportunity to comment on the draft report.
“Therefore, I am not surprised that they came to the wrong conclusion in their investigation,” he said, adding that ActionSA’s disciplinary process followed due procedure.
Beaumont also pointed out that while Cassim had publicly criticised ActionSA’s handling of the matter, he had not challenged the party’s disciplinary decision through the courts.
Cassim has since indicated that he is preparing further legal action, this time against ActionSA, arguing that his dismissal inflicted lasting damage on his political career.
“Their actions have damaged my political career substantially and it is going to be difficult getting back into the political sphere, but as with the Newcastle Municipality, this is about accountability, and ActionSA has tarnished my career,” he said.
Beaumont rejected any suggestion that the High Court ruling or the Public Protector’s report undermines ActionSA’s position.
Drawing a clear line between the municipality’s conduct and ActionSA’s disciplinary findings, he said:
“The matter of whether or not the municipality was liable for their actions, in relation to Mr Cassim’s business premises prior to the 2021 local government elections, was not the subject of Mr Cassim’s termination from the party. ActionSA has always contended that the actions of the municipality were unlawful and that Mr Cassim had every right to pursue the matter in court. As a matter of fact, ActionSA had advised Mr Cassim on multiple occasions that he ought to pursue the matter through a court order and avoid any appearance of impropriety by having the matter resolved through an-out-of-court settlement by a municipal government in which Mr Cassim held high office as the Chief Whip. Mr Cassim ignored this directive.”
Beaumont further argued that ActionSA’s case centred on what it viewed as an abuse of public office.
“This was a patent abuse of power and public trust and an abuse of ActionSA’s involvement in the coalition. As a part of our investigation, the KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Chairperson of ActionSA, Zwakele Mncwango, and I personally travelled to Newcastle to meet with the IFP Mayor, Cllr Davis Xolani Dube, during which meeting the Mayor confirmed that Mr Cassim had been pressuring him and everyone in the coalition to finalise an out of court settlement. Disturbingly, the Mayor conveyed this information to ActionSA in a manner that demonstrated that he was a willing participant in this process, which is concerning when one has regard for the fact that this settlement was made without the requisite resolution of the municipal council.”
He concluded by reaffirming ActionSA’s stance:
“This finding remains valid, and unimpeached, by the Public Protector’s investigation that focussed on the separate matter of the lawsuit and not the matter of the abuse of power. As much as Mr Cassim would like to parade himself as a victim in this matter, he is very much the perpetrator and the residents of Newcastle were his victims.”
Ultimately, the latest developments do not provide a neat ending to the Cassim saga.
They establish that the municipality’s original action against his businesses was legally flawed, and that the Public Protector did not find wrongdoing in respect of the payment investigated.
However, they do not settle ActionSA’s separate allegations about political conduct, conflict of interest, and the manner in which the settlement was pursued.
As a result, the matter remains divided between two competing narratives: Cassim’s claim that he has been vindicated, and ActionSA’s insistence that the real issue was never the lawsuit itself, but the conduct of a senior public representative while a personal financial dispute with the municipality was still unfolding.
Until Cassim’s threatened legal action against ActionSA is tested, the matter remains far from closed.
What are your thoughts on this? Let us know below.
Be sure to read: AMSA Newcastle Works Rescue Talks Gain Momentum
2 Responses
At no given time was a senior member of ActionSA involved in this case although they were aware about it . When the case was officially withdrawn in 2023 due to lack of evidence it was with cost in favour of Newcastle industrial laundry. The president of ActionSA was made aware of it and was informed of the lawsuit that was to follow. The out of court settlement was between both lawyers failed for damages cost resulting in the case proceeding.At all times legal representatives was involved . According to the law legal representative of parties are allowed to engage in settlements to avoid legal costs. Beaumont at no given time stated that the parties could not try and settle the matter out of court so his statement is false . I was not part of the meeting he had with IPF mayor so the content discussed and disclosed is new to me . All engagements was via attorneys. The matter is still in court
As an x member of the coalition I personally am not aware of Mr Cassim trying to use the coalition partnership to assist in pursuing his matter at any stage!