Special Investigation Unit and Another v Lekalakala and Others (NW/07/2020) [2020] ZAST 1 (10 July 2020)

Special Investigation Unit and Another v Lekalakala and Others (NW/07/2020) [2020] ZAST 1 (10 July 2020)

The Tribunal found that, although the applicants did not provide all necessary details regarding the investigation and the value of the pension, there were grave allegations of misconduct against the first respondent, who was responsible for significant maladministration as accounting officer. The Tribunal accepted...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] ZAST 1
Parties
Applicant: Special Investigating Unit; Applicant: MEC for the North West Department of Health; Respondent: Andrew Thabo Lekalakala; Respondent: Government Employees Pension Fund; Respondent: Government Pensions Administration Agency
Court
Special Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 July 2020
Case Number
NW/07/2020
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interim Interdict Application Before the Special Tribunal
Outcome
Interim interdict granted restraining payment of the first respondent's pension benefit pending final determination of action; applicants ordered to comply with time-bound steps; costs awarded partially to applicants.
Judges
Siwendu
Legal Topics
Interim Interdict, Pension Fund Withholding, Misconduct by Public Official, Special Investigating Units and Special Tribunals Act, Prima Facie Right, Balance of Convenience
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Interim Interdict Pension Fund Withholding Misconduct by Public Official Special Investigating Units and Special Tribunals Act Prima Facie Right Balance of Convenience

Source-derived case record

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Special Investigating Unit

Applicant

MEC for the North West Department of Health

Applicant

Andrew Thabo Lekalakala

Respondent

Government Employees Pension Fund

Respondent

Government Pensions Administration Agency

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Interim Interdict Application Before the Special Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to an interim interdict restraining payment of the first respondent's pension benefits pending final determination of action against him.
  2. 2 Whether section 37D(1)(b) of the Pension Funds Act empowers the Tribunal to grant the relief sought.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants have established a prima facie right and the balance of convenience favours granting the interdict.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that, although the applicants did not provide all necessary details regarding the investigation and the value of the pension, there were grave allegations of misconduct against the first respondent, who was responsible for significant maladministration as accounting officer. The Tribunal accepted that section 37D(1)(b) of the Pension Funds Act, interpreted purposively and in line with Highveld Steel, empowers it to withhold payment of pension benefits pending determination of liability. The applicants established a prima facie right and a well-grounded apprehension of irreparable harm, as the respondent's financial circumstances would likely result in dissipation of the...

Court Disposition

Interim interdict granted restraining payment of the first respondent's pension benefit pending final determination of action; applicants ordered to comply with time-bound steps; costs awarded partially to applicants.

Orders

  • The Government Employees Pension Fund and Government Pensions Administration Agency are restrained and interdicted from paying out the entire pension benefit portion held to the credit of Andrew Thabo Lekalakala pending action to be instituted by the applicants in the Special Tribunal.
  • The first applicant must procure extension of its powers in terms of the Proclamation within 30 days, finalise its investigation within 60 days, and institute action proceedings within 20 days of completion of the investigation.