Magabane v Municipal Employees Pension Fund (81389/15) [2017] ZAGPPHC 517 (10 April 2017)

Magabane v Municipal Employees Pension Fund (81389/15) [2017] ZAGPPHC 517 (10 April 2017)

The court found that the Fund was empowered by section 12(4) of the Pension Funds Act to amend its rules with retrospective effect, provided the Registrar approved and registered the amendment. The new Rule, which reduced the withdrawal benefit multiplier, was expressly made retrospective to 1 April 2013 and was registered accordingly. The applicant resigned after the effective date, and thus the new Rule applied to his withdrawal benefits. The Pension Fund Adjudicator's determination was incorrect in law, as there was no authority supporting the view that retrospective amendments could not apply to benefits accrued before registration when the intention was clear. The application to...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 517
Parties
Applicant: Thabo Gelliot Magabane; Respondent: Municipal Employees Pension Fund
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 April 2017
Case Number
81389/15
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Final Judgment on Application and Counter Application
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs. Condonation for late filing of answering affidavit granted. Condonation for late filing of counter-application dismissed with costs.
Judges
P M Mabuse
Legal Topics
Pension Fund Amendment, Retrospective Application of Rules, Jurisdiction of Pension Fund Adjudicator, Joinder of Parties
Civil Procedure Banking and Finance Pension Fund Amendment Retrospective Application of Rules Jurisdiction of Pension Fund Adjudicator Joinder of Parties

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thabo Gelliot Magabane

Applicant

Municipal Employees Pension Fund

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Final Judgment on Application and Counter Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Pension Fund Adjudicator's determination should be made an order of court.
  2. 2 Whether the amendment to the Fund's Rules could be applied retrospectively to benefits accrued before registration.
  3. 3 Whether the Fund's failure to join the Pension Fund Adjudicator in the counter-application affects the validity of the relief sought.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Fund was empowered by section 12(4) of the Pension Funds Act to amend its rules with retrospective effect, provided the Registrar approved and registered the amendment. The new Rule, which reduced the withdrawal benefit multiplier, was expressly made retrospective to 1 April 2013 and was registered accordingly. The applicant resigned after the effective date, and thus the new Rule applied to his withdrawal benefits. The Pension Fund Adjudicator's determination was incorrect in law, as there was no authority supporting the view that retrospective amendments could not apply to benefits accrued before registration when the intention was clear. The application to...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs. Condonation for late filing of answering affidavit granted. Condonation for late filing of counter-application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.
  • The application for the late filing of the respondent's answering affidavit is granted and the respondent is ordered to pay the costs of such application.