Scheepers v Voorsitter van die Raad van Trustees van die Sasol Pensioenfonds (4761/1998) [2002] ZAFSHC 19 (21 November 2002)

Scheepers v Voorsitter van die Raad van Trustees van die Sasol Pensioenfonds (4761/1998) [2002] ZAFSHC 19 (21 November 2002)

The court found that the applicant failed to establish reviewable grounds for setting aside the trustees' decision. The medical evidence before the trustees at the time did not conclusively prove that the applicant was totally and permanently disabled from performing any occupation for which she was reasonably qualified. The trustees considered all relevant medical reports and acted within their discretion as required by the pension fund rules. The applicant was given opportunities to submit further information and to make new applications. There was no contractual or statutory right for the applicant to appear personally before the trustees, and the process afforded her sufficient...

Citation
[2002] ZAFSHC 19
Parties
Applicant: Jacomina Elizabeth Scheepers; Respondent: Chairperson of the Board of Trustees of the Sasol Pension Fund; Respondent: Sasol Pension Fund
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 November 2002
Case Number
4761/1998
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
G Van Coppenhagen, JP Malherbe
Legal Topics
Pension Fund Rules, Disability Benefits, Review of Administrative Action, Natural Justice
Administrative Law Labour Law Pension Fund Rules Disability Benefits Review of Administrative Action Natural Justice

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jacomina Elizabeth Scheepers

Applicant

Chairperson of the Board of Trustees of the Sasol Pension Fund

Respondent

Sasol Pension Fund

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the decision of the first respondent to refuse the applicant's disability pension was reviewable on administrative law grounds.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was totally and permanently disabled as defined in the pension fund rules.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was denied a fair hearing before the pension fund trustees.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to establish reviewable grounds for setting aside the trustees' decision. The medical evidence before the trustees at the time did not conclusively prove that the applicant was totally and permanently disabled from performing any occupation for which she was reasonably qualified. The trustees considered all relevant medical reports and acted within their discretion as required by the pension fund rules. The applicant was given opportunities to submit further information and to make new applications. There was no contractual or statutory right for the applicant to appear personally before the trustees, and the process afforded her sufficient...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the application.