THE FINANCIAL SERVICES TRIBUNAL

In the matter between:

Case Number: PFA106/2019

M E MAKUNYANE (MOTSEPE)	APPLICANT

and

OLD MUTUAL SUPERFUND PROVIDENT FUND	FIRST RESPONDENT 

OLD MUTUAL LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY
(SOUTH AFRICA) LIMITED	SECOND RESPONDENT

EL-TORO BUTCHERY (PTY) LTD	THIRD RESPONDENT

PENSION FUNDS ADJUDICATOR	FOURTH RESPONDENT

DECISION

RECONSIDERATION APPLICATION IN TERMS OF SECTION 230 OF THE FINANCIAL SECTOR REGULATION ACT 9 OF 2017

The applicant, M E Makunyane (Motsepe), applied for the reconsideration of a decision of the Adjudicator, dated 14 October 2019. The parties agreed to the application being decided solely on the papers without the need for a formal hearing. I have read all the papers submitted and considered all the submissions made by the parties.

The application for reconsideration is dismissed in terms of section 234(4) of the FSR Act which provides that "The Tribunal may, by order, summarily dismiss an application for reconsideration of a decision if the application is frivolous, vexatious or trivial."

The applicant's case is that she is entitled to the relief sought because her former employer did not dispute her allegations and that the so-called Plascon-Evans rule applied.

Her misconception is that her facts do not make out any case entitling her to relief other than that provided by the PFA in the original determination.
 Page 2

As stated by the PFA in the explanatory note, the employer was not obliged to join the fund before 2011 and that as to what had happened before then is time barred.

LTC HARMS

Deputy Chairperson 25 March 2020