South Africa and global insurance, financial institutions, banking and general law know–how
The Constitutional Court has provided much needed certainty to the retirement fund industry following the surprising April 2022 judgment of the Supreme Court of Appeal in Municipal Employees Pension Fund & Another v Pandelani Midas Mudau and Another.
On 02 August 2023, the Constitutional Court overturned the SCA judgment. The facts of the matter…
This blog was co-authored with Rory Scott, Candidate Attorney.
On 15 March 2023, the Financial Services Tribunal dismissed a reconsideration application, ruling that a fund cannot rely on a benefit being in the process of being automatically paid as a defence to a pension interest claim.
The non-member spouse filed a complaint on 12 May…
In October 2022, the High Court in KeyHealth Medical Scheme v Ngoepe No and Others considered whether the court a quo was correct in finding that a medical scheme was prohibited from using day-to-day benefits to fund the treatment and costs of Prescribed Minimum Benefit (PMB) conditions. The court found that the source of the…
This blog was co-authored by: Bwanika Lwanga, Candidate Attorney
In June 2022, the High Court held that a claim by a provident fund for interest on late-paid contributions had prescribed.
The parties signed an acknowledgement of debt on 26 November 2013 for a total of R12 488 219. 04 owed by an employer to the…
This blog was co-authored by Bwanika Lwanga, Candidate Attorney
The English judgment of Butler-Sloss & Ors v The Charity Commission for England and Wales & Anor [2022] EWHC 974 (Ch), considered the question of whether the trustees of two charitable trusts could adopt investment policies that exclude profitable potential investments on the basis…
On 23 February 2022, the Financial Services Tribunal (FST) reinforced that an employee who does not have a “complaint” as provided for, in section 30A of the Pension Funds Act,1956 (PFA) cannot have recourse under the PFA.
The fact of the case are:
…
A pension fund failed in its application for reconsideration of the Pension Fund Adjudicator’s (PFA) decision to refer the matter back to the fund for reconsideration because, according to the Financial Services Tribunal the fund is not a ‘person aggrieved’ as required by section 230 of the Financial Sector Regulation Act of 2017.
The fund…
The Tribunal has determined that the employer in the recent decision in the matter of Oasis Group Holdings (Pty) Limited v Mansoor and Others, is liable for the costs of the fund member in opposing the application on the High Court scale.
The costs order comes in the wake of the Tribunal having repeatedly…
In Nicolaas Albertus Van Rhyn and Another v The Pension Funds Adjudicator and Others, the applicants brought an application for review and remittal back for reconsideration of a determination by the Pension Fund Adjudicator (PFA). Providing the High court of South Africa (Court) with an opportunity to consider the final and binding nature of…
In February 2021, the Financial Services Tribunal (“FST”) in L.S Ngqengelele v Afrisam South Africa (Pty) Ltd considered the question of when a fund may withhold and deduct money from a member’s benefit in accordance with section 37D(1)(b)(ii) of the Pension Funds Act (“PFA”).
Section 37D(1)(b)(ii) of the PFA, allows a fund to deduct from…
