Hangana v Government Employees Pension Fund (2608/2017) [2018] ZAECPEHC 78 (6 November 2018)

Hangana v Government Employees Pension Fund (2608/2017) [2018] ZAECPEHC 78 (6 November 2018)

The court held that the respondent, upon being notified of the error in the applicant's pension calculation, had a constitutional and statutory obligation to act and provide the necessary information. The respondent failed to do so until litigation was initiated, which amounted to administrative inaction. The Department of Education, while the source of the incorrect information, had no direct interest in the outcome and need not have been joined. The respondent's eventual compliance did not absolve it from liability for the costs incurred due to its inertia. Accordingly, the respondent was ordered to pay the costs of the application.

Citation
[2018] ZAECPEHC 78
Parties
Applicant: Nomangwanya Hangana; Respondent: Government Employees Pension Fund
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 November 2018
Case Number
2608/2017
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Costs Determination After Main Relief Resolved
Outcome
Application for costs granted in favour of the applicant.
Judges
E Revelas
Legal Topics
Promotion of Access to Information Act, Administrative Inaction, Misjoinder, Constitutional Obligations
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Promotion of Access to Information Act Administrative Inaction Misjoinder Constitutional Obligations

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nomangwanya Hangana

Applicant

Government Employees Pension Fund

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Costs Determination After Main Relief Resolved

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent failed to comply with its statutory and constitutional obligations to provide correct pension information and act upon errors.
  2. 2 Whether the Department of Education should have been joined as a party to the proceedings.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent should bear the costs of the application after providing the requested information only upon litigation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the respondent, upon being notified of the error in the applicant's pension calculation, had a constitutional and statutory obligation to act and provide the necessary information. The respondent failed to do so until litigation was initiated, which amounted to administrative inaction. The Department of Education, while the source of the incorrect information, had no direct interest in the outcome and need not have been joined. The respondent's eventual compliance did not absolve it from liability for the costs incurred due to its inertia. Accordingly, the respondent was ordered to pay the costs of the application.

Court Disposition

Application for costs granted in favour of the applicant.

Orders

  • The respondent is directed to pay the costs of the application.