Suspended African National Congress (ANC) secretary-general Ace Magashule intends applying for leave to appeal after the Free State High Court in Bloemfontein dismissed his and his co-accused's legal challenges to the validity of the "asbestos heist" prosecution against them.

Judge Soma Naidoo last month dismissed all the accused's applications with costs. 

In court papers filed on Thursday, Magashule said he intended to approach the Supreme Court of Appeal to apply for leave to appeal against the entire judgment and order.

Magashule said that the High Court erred in its decision.

He had asked the High Court to find there was no prima facie case against him that, "... could sustain a successful prosecution".

Magashule, Sodi and their co-accused have been charged with fraud, corruption, theft, and money laundering, among other charges, linked to a R255-million contract for the assessment and removal of asbestos from roofs and/or housing in some of the Free State's poorest areas.

That 2014 contract, the State alleged, would be defined by rent-seeking and corruption and would ultimately result in two subcontracted companies being paid R21-million to do the work, which was never actually completed. The rest of the money was allegedly pocketed by the accused.

Magashule argued that Naidoo failed to deal with the State's striking out application concerning certain portions of the applicant's founding and replying affidavits.

"Counsel for the applicant made submissions to dismiss the state's striking out application, yet the order and judgments are silent in this regard." 

Another complaint from Magashule included that the Advocate Johannes de Nysschen, the prosecutor assigned to the case, initially claimed that his former PA Moroadi Cholota was a State witness against him, but she was later declared an accused.

He said that it was also discovered that the State did not have a signed statement by Cholota.

Magashule claimed that Cholota was misled into believing that she had no choice but to be a State witness in an email sent by De Nysschen.

"All the pertinent facts were placed before the Honourable Mrs Justice Naidoo, and when compared to the bald, sketchy and untenable version tendered by the State, the Honourable Mrs Justice Naidoo erred in not granting any relief and by dismissing the applicant's application with costs.

"Based on the above, there are reasonable prospects of the applicant succeeding on appeal and therefore, reasonable prospects that another court would come to a different conclusion," the papers read.