South Africa Case Law

Tongaat Hulett Sugar South Africa Limited v Tongaat Hulett Pension Fund 2010 and Others (AR27/2022)

Tongaat Hulett Sugar South Africa Limited v Tongaat Hulett Pension Fund 2010 and Others (AR27/2022) [2023] ZAKZPHC 34 (3 March 2023)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

AR27/2022

Judges

Seegobin, P Bezuidenhout, Thobela-Mkhulisi

The court held that the challenge to the adjudicator's determination should be brought as an appeal in the wide sense under section 30P of the Pension Funds Act, not as a review under PAJA. The High Court is empowered to reconsider the merits of the complaint afresh and is not limited to the grounds or evidence considered by the adjudicator. The pension fund was entitled to withhold Ms Mayola's pension benefits pending the determination of her liability for alleged misconduct, as permitted by section 37D(1)(b)(ii) of the Pension Funds Act and the fund's rules. The adjudicator erred in finding…

Source excerpt

• Pension Funds Act Section 30p
• Withholding Of Pension Benefits
• Appeal In The Wide Sense
• Fiduciary Duty Of Fund Trustees
• Internal Remedies Financial Sector Regulation Act

South African National Blood Service Provident Fund and Another v Pension Fund Adjudicator and Others (53555/17)

South African National Blood Service Provident Fund and Another v Pension Fund Adjudicator and Others (53555/17) [2022] ZAGPPHC 365 (20 May 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

53555/17

Judge

N V Khumalo

The court found that at the time the complaint was lodged with the Pension Fund Adjudicator, there were no criminal or civil proceedings pending against the complainant, and the applicants had unduly delayed instituting civil proceedings since 2015. The subsequent institution of summons after the complaint did not cure the delay. The Fund Rules and section 37D of the Pension Funds Act did not justify the continued withholding of benefits in the absence of ongoing proceedings. Applying the heightened threshold for leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act, the court…

Source excerpt

• Leave To Appeal Threshold
• Pension Funds Act Section 30p
• Withholding Of Benefits
• Condonation
• Delay In Instituting Proceedings

Municipal Employees Pension Fund and Another v Ramohale and Others (27708/18)

Municipal Employees Pension Fund and Another v Ramohale and Others (27708/18) [2022] ZAGPJHC 164 (18 March 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

27708/18

Judge

Senyatsi

The High Court reviewed and set aside a Pension Funds Adjudicator determination, holding the Adjudicator lacked jurisdiction and that a late appeal should be condoned.

• Pension Funds Act Section 30p
• Retrospective Rule Amendment
• Jurisdiction Of Adjudicator
• Procedural Fairness
• Fiduciary Duties Of Trustees
• Condonation For Late Appeal

Edumbe Municipality v Makhoba and Others (1940/16P)

Edumbe Municipality v Makhoba and Others (1940/16P) [2016] ZAKZPHC 100 (27 October 2016)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

1940/16P

Judge

Seegobin

The High Court set aside the Pension Funds Adjudicator’s ruling, finding the complaint time-barred and affected by errors about the applicable fund rules.

• Pension Funds Act Section 30p
• Condonation Of Late Filing
• Prescription Act Section 12
• Procedural Fairness
• Jurisdiction Of High Court
• Pension-funds-act

Gerson v Mondi Pension Fund and Others (31983/12)

Gerson v Mondi Pension Fund and Others (31983/12) [2013] ZAGPJHC 160; 2013 (6) SA 162 (GSJ) (21 May 2013)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

31983/12

Judge

DTvR Du Plessis

High Court appeal under section 30P failed. The court held that the pension fund board’s discretion was lawfully exercised and that no procedural unfairness was shown.

• Pension Funds Act Section 30p
• Board Discretion
• Audi Alteram Partem
• Administrative Action Definition
• Procedural Fairness
• Pension-funds-act

Old Mutual Life Assurance Co. SA. Ltd v Pensions fund Adjudicator and Others, Old Mutual Life Assurance Co. SA. Ltd v Pensions fund Adjudicator and Others (7248/06, 7343/06)

Old Mutual Life Assurance Co. SA. Ltd v Pensions fund Adjudicator and Others, Old Mutual Life Assurance Co. SA. Ltd v Pensions fund Adjudicator and Others (7248/06, 7343/06) [2008] ZAKZHC 76 (15 October 2008)

Court

High Courts - Kwazulu Natal

Case number

7248/06, 7343/06

Judge

Sishi

The court held that the Pension Funds Adjudicator lacked jurisdiction to determine the complaints, as they did not relate to the administration, investment, or rules of the pension funds but rather to the calculation of insurance policy values—a matter for the Long-term Insurance Ombudsman. The policies in question entitled Old Mutual to determine surrender and early retirement values using actuarial principles, which included the application of a Market Level Adjustor. The accumulation account was not an absolute entitlement except at maturity or death, and the contractual provisions did not…

Source excerpt

• Pension Funds Act Section 30p
• Market Level Adjustor
• Insurance Policy Interpretation
• Jurisdiction Of Adjudicator
• Actuarial Principles

Old Mutual Life Assurance Company (South Africa) Limited v Pension Funds Adjudicator and Others (7492/06)

Old Mutual Life Assurance Company (South Africa) Limited v Pension Funds Adjudicator and Others (7492/06) [2006] ZAWCHC 47; [2007] 2 All SA 98 (C); 2007 (3) SA 458 (C) (26 October 2006)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

7492/06

Judge

P.B. Fourie

The court held that the Pension Funds Adjudicator, having performed a judicial function in determining the complaint, lacked standing to oppose the High Court review of his own determination. The Adjudicator's participation would compromise the impartiality required of his office. On the merits, the court found that the reduction of the paid-up value of the policy was justified and calculated in accordance with generally accepted actuarial principles, the rules of the fund, the terms of the policy, and the requirements of the Long-Term Insurance Act. The Adjudicator erred in concluding that t…

Source excerpt

• Pension Funds Act Section 30p
• Long Term Insurance Act
• Actuarial Principles
• Standing Of Statutory Adjudicator
• Paid Up Policy Value
• Maladministration Of Fund

Berge v Alexander Forbes Retirement Fund (Pension Section) and Another (04/31647)

Berge v Alexander Forbes Retirement Fund (Pension Section) and Another (04/31647) [2006] ZAGPHC 241 (18 April 2006)

Court

High Courts - Gauteng

Case number

04/31647

Judge

Moshidi

High Court review of a pension fund death-benefit distribution and Adjudicator ruling; application dismissed because the trustees acted fairly and lawfully.

• Pension Funds Act Section 30p
• Death Benefit Distribution
• Trustee Discretion
• Dependant Definition
• Judicial Review
• Onus Of Proof