Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality v Germiston Municipal Retirement Fund (CCT226/15) [2017] ZACC 1; 2017 (6) BCLR 750 (CC) (17 January 2017)

Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality v Germiston Municipal Retirement Fund (CCT226/15) [2017] ZACC 1; 2017 (6) BCLR 750 (CC) (17 January 2017)

The Constitutional Court held that the interpretation of rule 10.8.1 of the Fund Rules, as previously determined by the Supreme Court of Appeal, remains binding. The new evidence presented by the Municipality was available during earlier litigation and failed to meet the test for admission. The Municipality did not demonstrate that enforcement of the rule impeded its constitutional obligations, nor did it establish that the rule was contrary to public policy. The duty of good faith owed by the Fund's Board is to the Fund and its members, not to the Municipality. The doctrine of res iudicata applies, barring the Municipality from raising the same interpretive defence. Leave to appeal was...

Citation
[2017] ZACC 1
Parties
Applicant: Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality; Respondent: Germiston Municipal Retirement Fund
Court
Constitutional Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 January 2017
Case Number
CCT 226/15
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Constitutional Court Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Mogoeng, Nkabinde, Cameron, Froneman, Jafta, Khampepe, Madlanga, Mbha, Musi, Zondo
Legal Topics
Municipal Pension Fund Rules, Public Policy Contracts, Res Iudicata, Constitutional Obligations of Municipalities, Fiduciary Duty Pension Fund Board, Issue Estoppel
Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Municipal Pension Fund Rules Public Policy Contracts Res Iudicata Constitutional Obligations of Municipalities Fiduciary Duty Pension Fund Board +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality

Applicant

Germiston Municipal Retirement Fund

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Constitutional Court Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Constitutional Court should reconsider the interpretation of rule 10.8.1 of the Fund Rules based on new evidence.
  2. 2 Whether the Municipality's constitutional obligations override its liability under the pension fund rule.
  3. 3 Whether enforcement of the rule offends public policy.

Ratio Decidendi

The Constitutional Court held that the interpretation of rule 10.8.1 of the Fund Rules, as previously determined by the Supreme Court of Appeal, remains binding. The new evidence presented by the Municipality was available during earlier litigation and failed to meet the test for admission. The Municipality did not demonstrate that enforcement of the rule impeded its constitutional obligations, nor did it establish that the rule was contrary to public policy. The duty of good faith owed by the Fund's Board is to the Fund and its members, not to the Municipality. The doctrine of res iudicata applies, barring the Municipality from raising the same interpretive defence. Leave to appeal was...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is granted.
  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.