In the case of Stellenbosch University versus Jurie Roux, SA Rugby’s chief executive, it’s been a long seven years.

Before taking over at rugby’s head organisation, Roux was employed by Maties between 1994 and 2012, effectively running the Stellenbosch University Rugby Club along with Christiaan de Beer.

It’s fair to say Maties, Roux and de Beer haven’t parted ways amicably, with the university suing the pair for R37 million and alleging misappropriation of funds.

According to TimesLIVE, “the dispute is now set to go to independent arbitration in November”, after the involved parties agreed to remove the case from the Western Cape High Court:

The case has not been thrown out‚” Roux’s lawyer Frikkie Erasmus told TimesLIVE.

“Administratively‚ in terms of timing and time availability it is much easier to be in arbitration than in court.

“This doesn’t make it a better or worse outcome because a competent arbitrator has been appointed and was agreed to by both parties.

“The hearing will start on November 25 and has initially been allocated three weeks.

“We have no idea how long the hearing will take because there are a lot of witnesses to be called.”

Some have speculated that Maties prefer the arbitration angle, as details can be kept from the public eye, although both parties could still agree for the process to be open to the public.

The university’s chief operating officer, Stan du Plessis, said that arbitration was preferable because it was speedier and less costly.

Throughout the entire seven-year saga, Roux has fiercely maintained his innocence:

In a 16-page affidavit filed at the Western Cape High Court in early May‚ Roux challenged several claims made by the university in its case documentation.

“The university has not lost the R37 million it is claiming from me‚” Roux said in his affidavit…

“Secondly‚ to the knowledge of the university‚ I never took any money from the university (apart from my salary and benefits)‚ let alone R37 million.

“The university’s expert report confirms that I did not personally benefit from my alleged conduct relied upon for the claim.”

KPMG compiled a report back in 2017, which found that Roux “misrepresented the university’s funds”, “did not act in the best interests of the university”, and “potentially benefited personally from university funds”.

Roux also stands accused of using software that covered his tracks in terms of auditing, and concealed the movement of funds between accounts that he had access to.

Hopefully, November’s arbitration process can finally put this one to bed, because running SA Rugby with a massive cloud hanging over your head isn’t a good look.

[source:timeslive]