Municipal Employees' Pension Fund and Another Mudau and Another (61555/14) [2017] ZAGPPHC 157 (29 March 2017)

Municipal Employees' Pension Fund and Another Mudau and Another (61555/14) [2017] ZAGPPHC 157 (29 March 2017)

The court found that the Adjudicator had jurisdiction to determine the complaint as defined under the Pension Funds Act. The amended Rule, although registered with retrospective effect, could not be applied to the first respondent's accrued withdrawal benefit because he had resigned and his benefit had accrued before the amendment was registered. The presumption against retrospective application of statutory amendments, especially where accrued rights are affected, was reinforced by considerations of procedural fairness and the need for prior notice. The Adjudicator acted lawfully, fairly, and within her powers. The applicants failed to demonstrate any ground for review under section 30P...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 157
Parties
Applicant: Municipal Employees' Pension Fund; Applicant: Akani Retirement and Administrators; Respondent: Pendelani Midas Mudau; Respondent: Vhembe District Municipality
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 March 2017
Case Number
61555/14
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
TJ Raulinga
Legal Topics
Pension Fund Adjudicator Review, Retrospective Application of Rules, Procedural Fairness, Accrued Rights, Condonation
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Pension Fund Adjudicator Review Retrospective Application of Rules Procedural Fairness Accrued Rights Condonation

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Municipal Employees' Pension Fund

Applicant

Akani Retirement and Administrators

Applicant

Pendelani Midas Mudau

Respondent

Vhembe District Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Pension Fund Adjudicator had jurisdiction to determine the dispute regarding the retrospective application of the amended Rule.
  2. 2 Whether the amended Rule could be applied retrospectively to the first respondent's accrued withdrawal benefit.
  3. 3 Whether the Adjudicator's determination was liable to be reviewed and set aside under section 30P of the Pension Funds Act and PAJA.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Adjudicator had jurisdiction to determine the complaint as defined under the Pension Funds Act. The amended Rule, although registered with retrospective effect, could not be applied to the first respondent's accrued withdrawal benefit because he had resigned and his benefit had accrued before the amendment was registered. The presumption against retrospective application of statutory amendments, especially where accrued rights are affected, was reinforced by considerations of procedural fairness and the need for prior notice. The Adjudicator acted lawfully, fairly, and within her powers. The applicants failed to demonstrate any ground for review under section 30P...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Condonation for the late filing of the application is granted.
  • The application to review and set aside the Adjudicator's determination is dismissed with costs.