South Africa: A Shorter Road For Those Aggrieved

Last Updated: 11 January 2016
Article by Johann Spies

The Registrar of Pension Funds' locus standi to review the decisions of the Appeal Board in South Africa.

A decision-maker, as contemplated in the Financial Services Board Act, 1990, ("FSB Act"), makes a decision, the decision is appealed and the Appeal Board substitutes that decision. That decision-maker then decides to take the matter on review to the High Court. Does he or she, in terms of the relevant legislation, have locus standi to challenge the Appeal Board's decision? This question was recently raised and answered in the Supreme Court of Appeal in the matter between the Registrar of Pension Funds v Financial Services Appeal Board (222/2015) ZASA 203 (2 December 2015), which was written as a separate judgment, on this point alone, emanating from Tellumat (Pty) Ltd v Appeal Board of the Financial Services Board (221/2015) [2015] ZASCA 202.

In terms of section 26 of the FSB Act if anyone is aggrieved by any decision of a decision-maker, in this instance the Registrar of Pension Funds ("Registrar"), they are entitled to lodge an appeal against that decision with the Appeal Board. The Appeal Board then decides whether to confirm, set aside or vary the Registrar's decision, or to remit the matter for reconsideration by the Registrar. Where the Appeal Board endorses the Registrar's decision, and a party wishes to challenge it, they may do so by way of judicial review in terms of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, 2000 ("PAJA").

In the present case, the Registrar approved the transfer of a business in terms of section 14 of the Pension Funds Act, 1956. A group of pensioners, who regarded the division of the surplus of the relevant pension fund between the employer and the members as unduly favourable to the employer, appealed to the Appeal Board. Their challenge was successful and the Appeal Board set aside the Registrar's decision to approve the transfer. The Registrar and Tellumat (Pty) Ltd (the employer), both feeling aggrieved by the Board's decision, instituted proceedings by way of judicial review to the High Court, Pretoria. The High Court dismissed the challenges but gave the Registrar and the employer leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal ("SCA").

Usually, the decision that is being challenged is effectively that of the Registrar and the Registrar together with the Appeal Board are cited as parties to the review. However in the present case, the Registrar adopted an adversarial position towards the Appeal Board. Before the hearing on the actual appeal, the SCA raised the pertinent question relating to the Registrar's locus standi. The issue was whether the Registrar had the necessary locus standi to challenge on review a decision of the Appeal Board with which the Registrar did not agree.

The Court canvassed the following arguments presented by Counsel:

Party to the proceedings

The Registrar argued that in an appeal, it is a party to the proceedings and has the same right as any other party to challenge the outcome by way of judicial review. In response to this, the Court raised a hypothetical point that if the employer had not appealed and the other parties to the dispute had agreed to accept the decision made by the Appeal Board; such decision could be overturned by the Registrar taking the matter on review. The Court described this as a "most unusual situation".

If the Court allowed the Registrar to become an adversarial party to the appeal proceedings this would certainly be inconsistent with its role as impartial regulator acting in the interests of the industry. The role of the Registrar is to act as a neutral decision maker and to adopt an impartial stance when making decisions. If the Registrar should fail to act in this required manner, the bias shown by the Registrar would be a ground for review in terms of PAJA.

Further, the Court found that if the Registrar is permitted to challenge the Appeal Board's decision, allegations made by the Registrar in its argument could cause irreparable harm to the reputation of the Appeal Board. In the present case, the Registrar accused the Appeal Board of misdirection of fact and law, considering the irrelevant and disregarding relevant considerations. The Court expressed its disconcert by stating that "[a]fter all, if the Registrar regards the decisions of the Appeal Board as grossly unreasonable, why should the public have any faith in them?"

PAJA and the Constitution

The Registrar argued that its standing in the Court is provided for under PAJA and the Court addressed this locus standi point in terms of section 38 of the Constitution. Section 38 specifies who may approach a Court when it is alleged that a right in the Bill of Rights has been infringed or threatened. The Court considered two points which were raised in this regard:

  • Firstly, that the Registrar is acting in its own interest. The Court found that in order for this to be the case, the contested legal decision has to directly affect the Registrar's rights or interest, or potential rights or interests. The Court found that the only interest the Registrar had was that of a regulator and this did not cross the hurdle.
  • Secondly, that the Registrar is acting in the public's interest. The Registrar argued that it has important functions and an interest which is shared by the public in the correctness of its decisions. In this regard, the legislature foresaw that some decisions made by the Registrar would be incorrect. In order to overcome this problem, the legislature put in place a mechanism to challenge and correct these decisions. Plainly put, in certain instances the Registrar is wrong and the Appeal Board is right1.


The crux of the finding by the SCA is that the answer to the question of whether a party has locus standi will vary depending on the nature of the interest that the party seeks to protect. In order to determine the nature of that interest it is necessary to look at the purpose in the creation of the Appeal Board. The purpose is to allow persons affected by decisions of the Registrar to challenge those decisions before a specially constituted body.

To permit the Registrar to challenge the decision of the Appeal Board would upset the statutory relationship between the Registrar and the Appeal Board as set out in the FSB Act and it would be inconsistent with the purpose of creating the Appeal Board. The fact that Registrar has no locus standi in this regard does not detrimentally affect its regulatory functions as "t relates only to a narrow area where the Registrar disagrees with a decision of the Appeal Board overturning one of her decisions".

This may, however, have a substantial impact on persons negatively affected by a decision of any 'decision-maker' under the FSB Act. Quite simply, the decision effectively ensures that, bar extraordinary circumstances, the Appeal Board represents the end of the road for aggrieved persons where they are successful in that forum, but the road lies open for a review where they are not. If the relevant decision-maker disagrees with a decision made by the Appeal Board, it has no right to review such decision in the ordinary course as the Appeal Board's decision replaces the decision-maker's decision and for that reason cannot take its own decision on review.

It is important to note that the rule above is not without exceptions, the Court recognising as an exception the circumstances and finding which emanated from Financial Services Board & another v De Wet NO & others2, and which the Court itself confirmed in Pepcor Retirement Fund and Another v Financial Services Board and Another3, in which the Registrar sought judicial review of a decision it had made, and which the Appeal Board has concurred with, due to its becoming aware of misleading information having been placed before it. The Court in that instance confirmed the locus standi of the Registrar where it "had committed an irregular act in issuing the approval in the first instance and therefore had locus standi in the public interest to remedy the situation by seeking to set the approval aside by way of review proceedings".


1 It is worth reiterating the Court's reference to Justice Jackson, acting in the United States Supreme Court matter of Brown v Allen 344 US 443 at 540, stating that "We are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible only because we are final".

2 [2002] JOL 9319 (C)

3 [2002] ZASCA 198; 2003 (6) SA 38 (SCA) [2003] 3 All SA 21 (SCA)

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions