National Tertiary Retirement Fund v Registrar of Pension Funds (221/08) [2009] ZASCA 41; 2009 (5) SA 366 (SCA) ; [2009] 3 All SA 254 (SCA); (2009) 30 ILJ 1011 (SCA) (31 March 2009)

National Tertiary Retirement Fund v Registrar of Pension Funds (221/08) [2009] ZASCA 41; 2009 (5) SA 366 (SCA) ; [2009] 3 All SA 254 (SCA); (2009) 30 ILJ 1011 (SCA) (31 March 2009)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Registrar of Pension Funds does not have a broad discretion to refuse registration of a rule amendment under s 12(1)(b) of the Pension Funds Act. The Registrar is obliged to register an amendment if it is not inconsistent with the Act and is financially sound. The prohibition on reduction of benefits in s 37A does not apply to reductions effected by valid rule amendments. The proposed amendment, which made guaranteed benefits conditional on employer funding, was not inconsistent with the Act, nor did it contravene s 14A. The Board of Appeal and the High Court erred in law by upholding the Registrar's refusal based on an incorrect interpretation of...

Citation
[2009] ZASCA 41
Parties
Appellant: National Tertiary Retirement Fund; Respondent: Registrar of Pension Funds
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 March 2009
Case Number
221/08
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court, Pretoria
Outcome
Appeal upheld; decision of the Board of Appeal reviewed and set aside; Registrar directed to register the rule amendment.
Judges
Harms, Streicher, Cloete, Jafta, Bosielo
Legal Topics
Pension Funds Act, Rule Amendment Registration, Minimum Benefits, Financial Soundness, Promotion of Administrative Justice Act
Banking and Finance Administrative Law Pension Funds Act Rule Amendment Registration Minimum Benefits Financial Soundness Promotion of Administrative Justice Act

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

National Tertiary Retirement Fund

Appellant

Registrar of Pension Funds

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court, Pretoria

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Registrar of Pension Funds had discretion to refuse registration of a rule amendment under s 12(1)(b) of the Pension Funds Act.
  2. 2 Whether the proposed rule amendment reducing guaranteed benefits is inconsistent with s 37A and s 14A of the Pension Funds Act.
  3. 3 Whether the Board of Appeal and the High Court erred in law by upholding the Registrar's refusal to register the amendment.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Registrar of Pension Funds does not have a broad discretion to refuse registration of a rule amendment under s 12(1)(b) of the Pension Funds Act. The Registrar is obliged to register an amendment if it is not inconsistent with the Act and is financially sound. The prohibition on reduction of benefits in s 37A does not apply to reductions effected by valid rule amendments. The proposed amendment, which made guaranteed benefits conditional on employer funding, was not inconsistent with the Act, nor did it contravene s 14A. The Board of Appeal and the High Court erred in law by upholding the Registrar's refusal based on an incorrect interpretation of...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; decision of the Board of Appeal reviewed and set aside; Registrar directed to register the rule amendment.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with costs including the costs of two counsel.
  • The decision by the Board of Appeal is reviewed and set aside.