At the same time former Didata chairman Jeremy Ord and fellow ‘protagonists’ were trying to push through a BEE transaction that wasn’t – according to Judge Denise Fisher – the same actors were conducting ‘lawfare’ against the owners of the RandView Datacentre. In this explosive interview, small businessmen Gerry Comninos and Graham Roy explain how they were forced to spend millions – and three years – fighting an unjustified court action against Ord and his partners. It only ended when DiData’s Japanese owner NTT settled after realising the duo were targets and ‘not part of a scheme’
Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.
The seventh BizNews Conference, BNC#7, is to be held in Hermanus from March 11 to 13, 2025. The 2025 BizNews Conference is designed to provide an excellent opportunity for members of the BizNews community to interact directly with the keynote speakers, old (and new) friends from previous BNC events – and to interact with members of the BizNews team. Register for BNC#7 here.
Watch here
Listen here
BizNews Reporter
In a dramatic legal battle that spanned three years, Gerry Comninos and Graham Roy, co-owners of the Randview Data Center, found themselves at odds with one of the world’s largest IT services firms, Dimension Data (Didata), and its corporate tactics. The dispute, which began during a routine lease renewal negotiation, escalated into a complex and costly legal saga that exemplifies the challenges smaller businesses face when they square off against corporate giants.
Photos: Supplied
Read below
___STEADY_PAYWALL___
The initial setup: A lease agreement gone awry
The Randview Data Center, located in Randburg, South Africa, had originally been developed by Comninos and Roy in the early 2000s. They constructed the property with the intent to lease it to larger corporations, eventually entering into a long-term agreement with Xerox for a specialized data centre. After Xerox left the premises, Dimension Data expressed interest in leasing the site for their data operations. The duo negotiated a 10-year lease, with a five-year renewal period.
Dimension Data invested heavily in refurbishing the space into a state-of-the-art data centre, turning it into a highly sophisticated hub. It quickly became one of the company’s flagship data centres, attracting a substantial number of clients and generating significant revenue. However, the relationship between the small business owners and Dimension Data would soon turn sour when it came time for lease renewal.
A contentious lease renewal
As the lease renewal approached in 2019, the situation took an unexpected turn. The company’s management, led by Jeremy Ord (a co-founder of Dimension Data) and his associates—whom the court later referred to as the “protagonists”—appeared to be pursuing a strategy that undermined the terms of the original agreement. Comninos and Roy prepared for the renewal process in good faith, expecting typical negotiations. However, when they met with the Dimension Data representatives, they were shocked by the confrontational approach.
The meeting, attended by Sean Seliger and Martin Epstein, quickly revealed the aggressive stance taken by Dimension Data’s management. Seeliger, representing what he claimed was Jeremy Ord’s private property interests, suggested that the building was worth little and demanded a significantly reduced rent—substantially lower than the agreed-upon market rates outlined in the lease. To further pressure the owners, he claimed that if they did not agree to the reduced terms, Dimension Data would simply buy the building outright, or force them to sell it.
Comninos and Roy, taken aback by the tone of the negotiation, quickly recognized that they were not facing a typical renewal conversation. Instead, they were dealing with what seemed like an attempt to undermine their business and acquire the data centre at a deeply undervalued price. Seliger’s demand for a reduced rent of just 231,000 Rand per month, when the centre’s true market value should have supported a rent closer to 4 million Rand, was the catalyst that led to a bitter legal conflict.
The legal battle: Small business versus corporate power
Faced with a major discrepancy in valuations, Comninos and Roy took the matter to court. Their legal team argued that Dimension Data’s valuation was intentionally skewed to devalue the property. While Dimension Data’s representatives argued that the building was worth only 34 million Rand, the owners had their own valuation done, which pegged the value closer to 311 million Rand. This discrepancy, coupled with Dimension Data’s refusal to honor the market-related rent specified in the lease, triggered the lengthy legal battle.
The dispute was not only about money—it was a battle over fairness, trust, and ethics in business dealings. Comninos and Roy were steadfast in their belief that they were being manipulated. As the court case progressed, they encountered what they referred to as “lawfare”—the use of legal tactics to exhaust and wear down the opposition. The small business owners found themselves in an uphill battle against a company with far greater resources and legal firepower.
The case became emblematic of the challenges that smaller businesses face when negotiating with larger, more powerful corporations. Comninos and Roy were forced to spend significant amounts of money on legal fees, which, at times, threatened to destabilize their business. But they refused to back down. Their commitment to holding Dimension Data accountable for their actions drove them to continue fighting, despite the mounting costs.
The role of NTT and the final settlement
As the legal proceedings dragged on, Dimension Data was acquired by NTT, a Japanese multinational. It was only after this change in ownership that the situation began to shift in favour of Comninos and Roy. The new leadership at NTT seemed more willing to engage in fair negotiations. After multiple meetings with NTT representatives, the small business owners presented their case once more, emphasizing the original lease terms and the fair market valuation of the data center.
In an unexpected turn of events, NTT agreed to settle, acknowledging the validity of the original lease agreement and agreeing to pay a market-related rent. This settlement, which finally brought an end to the years-long legal battle, vindicated Comninos and Roy’s efforts. They had managed to navigate the complexities of corporate lawfare and come out on top.
The aftermath: Lessons learned
Looking back on the ordeal, Comninos and Roy stressed the importance of having a robust and watertight lease agreement. They noted that small business owners should never underestimate the value of a well-structured contract, as it can be the key to protecting their interests in situations like this one. In their case, the lease provided mechanisms for resolving disputes, but it was the determination to enforce it that ultimately led to a resolution.
The case also served as a cautionary tale about the power dynamics between small businesses and large corporations. For Comninos and Roy, the lesson was clear: when faced with unfair practices, small businesses must be prepared to stand their ground, no matter how difficult the journey may be.
Ultimately, the case was not just about the money—it was about ensuring that agreements are respected, and that powerful entities cannot manipulate smaller players for their own gain. For Comninos and Roy, the legal battle was a victory, not just in the courtroom, but in their unwavering commitment to business integrity.
Read also:
