South Africa Case Law

Motsioa and Others v eJoburg Retirement Fund and Others (43479/20)

Motsioa and Others v eJoburg Retirement Fund and Others (43479/20) [2022] ZAGPJHC 454 (6 July 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

43479/20

Judge

M A Makume

The court found that the allocation of 15% of the deceased's pension benefits to the third respondent was irrational and based on incorrect reasons, as she was neither a lawful dependant nor a valid spouse. The alleged customary marriage was void ab initio due to the third respondent's existing marriage and lack of consent from the civil spouse. The Trustees' discretion must be exercised in accordance with Section 37C of the Pension Funds Act, prioritizing lawful dependants and nominees. The High Court has jurisdiction to review and substitute the Pension Fund Adjudicator's determination. The…

Source excerpt

• Pension Fund Distribution
• Dependants Definition
• Customary Marriage Validity
• Review Of Adjudicator Decision

Nel and Others v Netcare 1999 Pension Fund and Others (8142/2019)

Nel and Others v Netcare 1999 Pension Fund and Others (8142/2019) [2020] ZAGPPHC 423 (24 August 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

8142/2019

Judge

S Baqwa

The High Court dismissed siblings’ review of a pension fund death-benefit award made to a minor dependant, holding they had not shown factual dependency.

• Pension Funds Act
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Dependants Definition
• Bloedige Hand Principle
• Pension-fund-death-benefits
• Section-37c

Government Employees Pension Fund Provincial Government of Gauteng v Buitendag and Others (550/05)

Government Employees Pension Fund Provincial Government of Gauteng v Buitendag and Others (550/05) [2006] ZASCA 166; [2007] 1 All SA 445 (SCA); 2007 (4) SA 2 (SCA) (27 September 2006)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

550/05

Judges

Harms, Zulman, Conradie, Cloete, Ponnan

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Board of the Government Employees Pension Fund has a discretion to allocate the death gratuity among dependants, but must do so on the basis of all material facts. The adult children of the deceased qualified as dependants under the Law and should have been considered by the Board. The Board's decision was made in ignorance of their existence, constituting a material mistake of fact and rendering the decision reviewable and liable to be set aside. The Provincial Government was obliged to provide complete information to the Fund regarding all dependant…

Source excerpt

• Government Employees Pension Law
• Dependants Definition
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Material Mistake Of Fact
• Allocation Of Gratuity