South Africa Case Law

Mudau v Municipal Employees Pension Fund and Others (CCT 142/22)

Mudau v Municipal Employees Pension Fund and Others (CCT 142/22) [2023] ZACC 26; 2023 (10) BCLR 1165 (CC); [2023] 11 BLLR 1109 (CC); (2023) 44 ILJ 2641 (CC) (2 August 2023)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT 142/22

Judges

Maya, Kollapen, Madlanga, Majiedt, Makgoka, Mathopo, Potterill, Rogers, Theron

The Constitutional Court held that a pension fund may not apply a rule amendment before it is registered by the Registrar of Pension Funds. The registered rules in force at the time of the member’s withdrawal are binding and must be used to calculate benefits. The Fund’s application of an unregistered amended rule to the applicant’s withdrawal benefit was unlawful and in breach of the Act and fiduciary duties. Retrospective rule amendments, once registered, do not affect legal proceedings already instituted unless the amendment expressly provides otherwise. The Adjudicator and courts must app…

Source excerpt

• Pension Funds Act
• Retrospective Rule Amendment
• Accrued Benefits
• Fiduciary Duty
• Statutory Interpretation
• Adjudicator Jurisdiction

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

Solidarity v Government Employees Pension Fund and Others (37300/2016)

Solidarity v Government Employees Pension Fund and Others (37300/2016) [2017] ZAGPPHC 1307 (14 December 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

37300/2016

Judge

TJ Raulinga

The High Court refused certification of a class action over amended GEPF actuarial interest factors, finding Solidarity was not a suitable representative.

• Class Action Certification
• Pension Fund Rules
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Majoritarianism In Collective Bargaining
• Retrospective Rule Amendment
• Suitability Of Representative