SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.20 issue1Parallel planning mechanisms as a "recipe for disaster" author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Indicators

    Related links

    • On index processCited by Google
    • On index processSimilars in Google

    Share


    Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal (PELJ)

    On-line version ISSN 1727-3781

    Abstract

    MARUMOAGAE, Motseotsile Clement. The law regarding pension interest in South Africa has been settled! Or has it? With reference to Ndaba v Ndaba (600/2015) [2016] ZASCA 162. PER [online]. 2017, vol.20, n.1, pp.1-22. ISSN 1727-3781.  https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2017/v20n0a1637.

    This article reflects on the law relating to pension interest in South Africa. In particular, it assesses whether the Supreme Court of Appeal in Ndaba v Ndaba (600/2015) [2016] ZASCA 162 adequately clarified how this area of law should be understood. In the light of the inconsistent approaches from various divisions of the High Court, it has not always been clear how the courts should interpret the law relating to pension interest in South Africa. In this paper, aspects of this area of law which have been clarified by the Supreme Court of Appeal are addressed. The paper also addresses aspects of this area of law which the Supreme Court of Appeal had not settled and which could potentially be subject to future litigation. The paper is based on the premise that while Ndaba v Ndaba is welcomed, the Supreme Court of Appeal nonetheless missed a golden opportunity to authoritatively provide a basis upon which the law relating to pension interest in South Africa should be understood.

    Keywords : Pension interest; entitlement; divorce; pension fund; spouse.

            · text in English     · English ( pdf )