Pirates secure court order to protect R20m in alleged financial fraud

Share current article via EmailShare current article via FacebookShare current article via TwitterShare current article via LinkedInMduduzi NonyaneOpens in new windowOpens in new windowEnter fullscreen mode displaying this image.ExpandOrlando Pirates boss Irvin Khoza. Picture: GALLO Story audio is generated using AI

Reigning PSL champions Orlando Pirates have secured an interim high court order preventing withdrawals from four bank accounts linked to its former finance manager, Darryl Brook Joselowsky, with at least R20.2m required to remain in the accounts as the club moves to preserve money it alleges was fraudulently diverted from its coffers.

The order, granted in the Johannesburg high court on September 22, directs Standard Bank to preserve the funds, “in order that a combined balance of no less than R20,269,420.75 remains therein”.

The court also ordered the bank to provide “full electronic and physical bank statements” for the accounts, including “contra-account numbers, branch codes and beneficiary identities for all outward transfers leaving such accounts”.

The relief follows an urgent application brought by Orlando Pirates Football Club, Orlando Pirates Retailing and Orlando Pirates Properties. Joselowsky and Standard Bank were cited as respondents.

The order allows the respondents to approach the court, on at least 48 hours’ notice and on good cause shown, to seek to have the relief set aside or varied. It is an interim order and does not amount to a final finding of fraud or liability.

In the founding affidavit, club commercial manager Mpumelelo Khoza said the alarm was raised in July while he was reviewing the group’s management accounts.

He said cash proceeds reflected in the accounts did not correspond with expected sales volumes, prompting a closer examination of the bank statements.

“Payment references on bank statements reflected descriptions corresponding to legitimate supplier/rental expenses, but the associated monetary figures did not tally with actual or expected supplier payments,” the affidavit states.

The club subsequently approached Standard Bank after transactions were flagged by the bank’s monitoring systems. According to the affidavit, the bank identified payments processed by a single operator and beneficiary names that did not match verified account holder details.

The operator code WCH30 was assigned to Joselowsky, who the affidavit says had worked for Pirates for more than 30 years and was responsible for bank accounts, payroll, supplier disbursements and financial ledgers.

The affidavit alleges that he had extensive control over the club’s banking facilities and could capture, verify and release payment batches without secondary authorisation or independent managerial approval.

The scale of the transactions is central to the club’s case.

According to the affidavit, bank records showed that R43,166,873 was transferred from the applicants’ accounts into four flagged Standard Bank accounts between September 29 2016 and August 25 2026.

A forensic analysis by accountant Alida Louise Jordaan allegedly identified R20,269,420.75 as unauthorised and fraudulent diversions to accounts controlled by Joselowsky.

The affidavit describes the alleged mechanism as involving “systematic deception”, including “the use of fictitious supplier descriptions and redirection of reimbursements”.

One example cited concerns a laptop purchased by senior manager Nkosana Khoza for an employee. The affidavit alleges that the club reimbursed the expense in cash through its petty-cash process, while an electronic transfer referencing Nkosana was made to Joselowsky’s personal bank account.

A schedule prepared by Jordaan allegedly identified 742 payments totalling R8,559,293.30 involving beneficiary descriptions the club says were falsely recorded. The affidavit alleges that the payments were divided into smaller amounts.

The document says the transactions were made through “742 separate payments of sufficiently small amounts that they would not attract the attention of the auditors”.

Pirates argued that urgent intervention was necessary because the disputed money could be moved between local and offshore accounts, making recovery difficult or impossible.

The affidavit warned that, without an interim order, the funds could be dissipated before the club could pursue a civil claim.

“If an interim freezing order is refused, the First Respondent will dissipate the stolen proceeds across multiple local and offshore banking accounts,” it states.

The club also raised concerns about Joselowsky’s overseas connections, alleging that he had recently acquired Austrian citizenship and held an Austrian passport.

The affidavit refers to frequent overseas leave as part of the club’s stated concern about the possibility of funds being moved beyond its reach. It does not establish that he travelled to Austria or that a court found he intended to flee.

The order requiring Standard Bank to provide detailed statements and beneficiary information could help the club trace the movement of the disputed funds. The application also reserves the question of costs against Joselowsky for a later stage of proceedings.

Responding to questions, Orlando Pirates spokesperson Thandi Morafe said the club had applied to preserve funds linked to certain financial transactions while the matter was investigated.

“The application is a precautionary step to protect the club’s funds. It is not a finding of wrongdoing and should not be interpreted as one,” she said.

Morafe added that the individual concerned was cooperating with the process and that the club would allow the matter to proceed fairly while its day-to-day operations and commitments continued as normal.

The club said it could not comment on the specific allegations because the matter was before court, and asked that reporting make clear that the allegations were contained in an application on which the court had not yet ruled.

The interim order preserves the disputed funds while allowing the respondents to return to court to challenge or vary the relief. The allegations against Joselowsky remain untested, and the order does not constitute a final finding of fraud or liability.