30 January 2026
On Friday, Wesley Neumann’s legal team asked the Labour Court to enforce an earlier ruling for his reinstatement as Heathfield High principal. From left: Advocate Vernon Seymour, Wesley Neumann and advocate Rod Solomons. Photo: Marecia Damons.
After a five-year legal battle, former Heathfield High principal Wesley Neumann will still not return to school for now.
Neumann was dismissed in 2020 for refusing to reopen the school in line with the Western Cape Education Department’s (WCED) directive during the covid pandemic.
In June 2020, Neumann and other school principals wrote an open letter to President Cyril Ramaphosa and the cabinet, requesting that schools remain closed.
Despite this, the WCED instructed teachers and Grade 12 learners at Heathfield High to return on 1 June 2020. When Neumann refused, the department scheduled a disciplinary hearing for October 2020. He was later dismissed.
Neumann took the matter to the Education Labour Relations Council, which upheld his dismissal in a June 2023 arbitration award. Neumann challenged this in Labour Court.
In January 2026, acting judge Coen de Kock overturned the arbitration award, ruling that dismissal was not an appropriate sanction. The Labour Court ordered Neumann’s reinstatement with back pay and cleared him of most misconduct charges. He was to be reinstated on 2 February.
On 23 January, the WCED filed a notice of intention to appeal, arguing the Labour Court had erred in its assessment of fairness and the handling of evidence in arbitration. In a statement, education MEC David Maynier said the leave to appeal application would suspend the order for Neumann to be reinstated.
Neumann’s legal team then launched a separate urgent application to enforce the reinstatement while the appeal is pending.
At Friday’s hearing, Neumann’s attorney, Vernon Seymour, said enforcement papers were served on the department via email on 26 January, with hard copies delivered the following day.
Advocate Colin Kahanovitz SC, for the WCED, argued that the application should be struck from the roll for “procedural non-compliance”. He said the department’s legal team had not been granted access to the court files through Court Online, questioned the urgency of the matter, and warned of a “growing abuse of the urgent court”.
Seymour responded that the department had been in possession of the papers, physically and digitally, and were not prejudiced. He argued that any procedural non-compliance should be overlooked in the interests of justice.
Judge Molatelo Robert Makhura noted the respondents’ concerns that they had not been invited to access the court file and that the application was filed under a different case number.
Makhura ruled it was “in the interest of justice” to overlook the non-compliance with the practice directives for urgent applications.
He ordered Neumann’s legal team to grant the respondents access through Court Online.
The matter was postponed to 13 February for the WCED to file answering papers and heads of argument. Costs were reserved.
Until the matter returns to court, Neumann will not return to Heathfield High.