Mine Employees Pension Fund v De La Rey NO (2011/36366, 2011/32949) [2012] ZAGPJHC 4 (7 February 2012)

Mine Employees Pension Fund v De La Rey NO (2011/36366, 2011/32949) [2012] ZAGPJHC 4 (7 February 2012)

The court held that the adjudicator, although not required to file an affidavit, was entitled to do so in order to assist the court in adjudicating the appeal. The filing of the affidavit did not constitute an irregular step under rule 30, as the adjudicator was cited as a respondent and became a party to the proceedings. The court found no prejudice to the applicant, as the applicant could have supplemented its founding affidavit in response and could seek a costs order if necessary. The main applications remained unopposed and should be enrolled accordingly. The application to set aside the affidavit was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2012] ZAGPJHC 4
Parties
Applicant: Mine Employees Pension Fund; Respondent: EM De La Rey NO
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 February 2012
Case Number
2011/36366, 2011/32949
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application to Set Aside Affidavit as Irregular Step Under Rule 30
Outcome
Applications to set aside the adjudicator's affidavit as an irregular step are dismissed.
Judges
FHD Van Oosten
Legal Topics
Pension Funds Act, Rule 30 Irregular Steps, Affidavit in Appeal Proceedings, Judicial Function of Adjudicator
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Pension Funds Act Rule 30 Irregular Steps Affidavit in Appeal Proceedings Judicial Function of Adjudicator

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mine Employees Pension Fund

Applicant

EM De La Rey NO

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application to Set Aside Affidavit as Irregular Step Under Rule 30

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the affidavit filed by the adjudicator in the appeal proceedings constitutes an irregular step under rule 30.
  2. 2 Whether the filing of the affidavit caused any prejudice to the applicant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the adjudicator, although not required to file an affidavit, was entitled to do so in order to assist the court in adjudicating the appeal. The filing of the affidavit did not constitute an irregular step under rule 30, as the adjudicator was cited as a respondent and became a party to the proceedings. The court found no prejudice to the applicant, as the applicant could have supplemented its founding affidavit in response and could seek a costs order if necessary. The main applications remained unopposed and should be enrolled accordingly. The application to set aside the affidavit was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Applications to set aside the adjudicator's affidavit as an irregular step are dismissed.

Orders

  • The applications are dismissed.