Mohapi v De Beers Pension Fund and Another (64/2015) [2016] ZASCA 14 (11 March 2016)

Mohapi v De Beers Pension Fund and Another (64/2015) [2016] ZASCA 14 (11 March 2016)

The court held that the appellant's dismissal from employment precluded him from being granted retirement on the grounds of ill-health under the fund's rules. The rules require that a member be employed at the time of retirement and that the employer must form the opinion that the member is incapable of working due to medical infirmity. The evidence showed that the employer did not hold such an opinion, but rather believed the appellant was malingering or that his incapacity was not medically substantiated. The Pension Fund Adjudicator's determination did not retrospectively restore the appellant's employment status, nor did it affect the validity of the dismissal. Accordingly, the...

Citation
[2016] ZASCA 14
Parties
Appellant: Mervyn Mohapi; Respondent: De Beers Pension Fund; Respondent: Pension Fund Adjudicator
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 March 2016
Case Number
64/2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Division, Pretoria
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Cachalia, Tshiqi, Pillay, Swain, Victor
Legal Topics
Pension Fund Rules, Ill Health Retirement, Dismissal for Incapacity, Interpretation of Fund Rules
Civil Procedure Labour Law Pension Fund Rules Ill Health Retirement Dismissal for Incapacity Interpretation of Fund Rules

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

Parties

Mervyn Mohapi

Appellant

De Beers Pension Fund

Respondent

Pension Fund Adjudicator

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Division, Pretoria

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's dismissal precluded approval of retirement on grounds of medical infirmity.
  2. 2 Whether the employer formed the requisite opinion that the appellant was incapable of working due to medical infirmity.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the appellant's dismissal from employment precluded him from being granted retirement on the grounds of ill-health under the fund's rules. The rules require that a member be employed at the time of retirement and that the employer must form the opinion that the member is incapable of working due to medical infirmity. The evidence showed that the employer did not hold such an opinion, but rather believed the appellant was malingering or that his incapacity was not medically substantiated. The Pension Fund Adjudicator's determination did not retrospectively restore the appellant's employment status, nor did it affect the validity of the dismissal. Accordingly, the...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.
  • The following words are deleted from paragraph two of the order of the court a quo: 'The decision of the trustees of the respondent, De Beers Pension Fund, conveyed to the complainant, Mervyn Mohapi, in a letter dated 13 September 2000, repudiating the complainant’s application for ill-health retirement benefits, is...