Date: 1 September 2025
Edition: August 2025
This monthly Municipal #iRestMyCaseZA digest summarises three key reported cases from 31 July to 31 August, decided in the superior Courts.
Case 1: Afriforum NPC v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Others [2025] ZAGPPHC 846
The applicant, Afriforum NPC, challenged the City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality’s imposition of a cleansing levy for the 2025/2026 financial year on properties not receiving municipal waste collection services. The court found the levy unlawful due to the municipality’s failure to comply with constitutional and legislative requirements, including lack of a properly promulgated tariff policy and the fact that the levy was not tied to services actually rendered by the municipality.
Key Takeaway: Municipalities must ensure that any imposed levies are supported by promulgated policies and directly linked to services provided to avoid being declared irrational and invalid.
Link: https://lawlibrary.org.za/akn/za-gp/judgment/zagpphc/2025/846/eng@2025-07-31
Case 2: Mutsila v Municipal Gratuity Fund and Others (CCT 228/23) [2025] ZACC 17
This case involved the distribution of a death benefit from the Municipal Gratuity Fund following the death of an employee of the Ba-Phalaborwa Municipality. The applicant challenged the Fund’s decision to include certain beneficiaries, arguing inadequate investigation. The Constitutional Court found the Fund’s probe insufficient, as it failed to verify claims of dependency and customary marriage, and remitted the matter for redetermination.
Key Takeaway: Pension funds associated with municipalities must perform thorough, evidence-based investigations to equitably distribute death benefits under section 37C of the Pension Funds Act.
Link: https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACC/2025/17.html
Case 3: South African Local Government Bargaining Council and Others v Municipal Workers Retirement Fund and Others (770/2023) [2025] ZASCA 120
The Supreme Court of Appeal upheld the setting aside of a collective agreement negotiated by the South African Local Government Bargaining Council, which included municipalities represented by SALGA. The agreement introduced an accreditation regime for retirement funds, requiring municipalities to stop contributions to unaccredited funds. The court ruled it unlawful, as it exceeded SALGA’s mandate and risked municipal financial stability without proper consideration of budgets and fiscal impacts.
Key Takeaway: Municipalities and their representatives must ensure collective agreements on retirement funds comply with statutory mandates and do not impose unconsidered financial burdens.
Link: https://www.supremecourtofappeal.org.za/index.php/component/jdownloads/send/98-judgements-2025/4500-south-african-local-government-bargaining-council-and-others-v-municipal-workers-retirement-fund-and-others-770-2023-2025-zasca-120-21-august-2025