THE FINANCIAL SERVICES TRIBUNAL

CASE NO.: PFA9/2023

PROTOCOL PROTECTION SERVICES	APPLICANT

and

THE PENSION FUNDS ADJUDICATOR	FIRST RESPONDENT 

PRIVATE SECURITY SECTOR 
PROVIDENT FUND	SECOND RESPONDENT

OCTAVIA NONDUMISO MAPASA	THIRD RESPONDENT

ORDER BY THE DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON

APPLICATION FOR RECONSIDERATION IN TERMS OF SECTION 230 OF THE FSR ACT 9 OF 2017

The determination by the PFA is set aside by consent on the ground that due to an administrative error the audi rule was not complied with.

Questions that the PFA may consider are whether the present determination can be said to have been based on the complaint and whether the complaint was not time barred.

LTC HARMS
Deputy Chairperson 12 April 2023