Betrayal Beyond the Grave: Widow Fights for Share of Late Husband’s R783,000 Pension After Girlfriend Named Beneficiary

In a case that underscores the complexities of South Africa’s marital and inheritance laws, Mmaseeiso Patricia Ramakatsa, a married mother of two, found herself excluded from her late husband Thokozani Ngema’s substantial pension fund, valued at over R783,000.

Instead, Ngema allocated portions of the fund to his six children and designated 8% to his girlfriend, leaving his estranged wife without any provision.

Ramakatsa and Ngema’s marital journey began with a customary marriage in 2008. However, their cohabitation was short-lived, lasting only from 2014 to 2015, leading to an extended period of separation that spanned at least eight years prior to Ngema’s death in April 2023.

During his tenure as an Eskom employee from March 2003 until his passing, Ngema made deliberate decisions regarding the beneficiaries of his provident fund.

Feeling unjustly excluded, Ramakatsa sought intervention from the Pension Fund Adjudicator (PFA), asserting her status as the surviving spouse under customary law.

The PFA, however, upheld Eskom’s pension fund’s distribution, emphasizing the deceased’s explicit wishes. Undeterred, Ramakatsa escalated her appeal to the Financial Services Tribunal (FST).

The FST’s deliberations highlighted a pivotal legal precedent: merely qualifying as a legal dependent does not guarantee entitlement to a portion of a death benefit.

The tribunal took into account the prolonged estrangement between Ramakatsa and Ngema. In contrast, evidence presented showed that the girlfriend had not only cohabited with Ngema but also contributed significantly to their shared household.

Moreover, she had two children with him, further solidifying her claim.

Given these circumstances, the FST deemed the distribution of the pension fund to be fair and reasonable, leading to the dismissal of Ramakatsa’s application.

Legal Context: Customary Marriages and Pension Fund Regulations in South Africa

This case brings to light the intricate interplay between South Africa’s legal frameworks governing marriage and pension fund distributions.

Customary Marriages:

In South Africa, customary marriages are recognized under the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act (RCMA) of 1998. This legislation ensures that customary marriages have the same legal standing as civil marriages, provided they meet specific requirements:

Consent: Both parties must consent to the marriage under customary law.
Age: Both individuals must be at least 18 years old.
Customary Practices: The marriage must be negotiated and entered into following customary law traditions.

It’s important to note that while registration of a customary marriage is advisable for legal clarity, failure to register does not invalidate the marriage. However, unregistered marriages can pose challenges in legal disputes, especially concerning inheritance and spousal rights.

Pension Fund Distributions:

The Pension Funds Act of 1956 governs the administration and distribution of pension funds in South Africa. Section 37C of the Act specifically addresses the payment of death benefits, aiming to ensure that dependents are adequately provided for, regardless of the deceased’s nomination. The Act defines dependents as:

Legal Dependents: Individuals legally entitled to maintenance from the deceased.
Factual Dependents: Individuals who were financially dependent on the deceased at the time of death.
Nominees: Individuals nominated by the deceased to receive benefits, provided they are not dependents.

The Act grants trustees of the pension fund discretion in distributing death benefits, requiring them to identify and allocate funds to dependents and nominees in a manner that is “fair and equitable.” This discretionary power means that the deceased’s nominations are considered but are not binding, as the primary objective is to ensure the financial well-being of all dependents.

Implications and Considerations:

This case underscores the importance of clear communication and legal documentation regarding one’s financial affairs and beneficiary intentions. For individuals in customary marriages, it’s crucial to:

Register the Marriage: While not mandatory, registration provides legal clarity and can prevent disputes.
Update Beneficiary Nominations: Regularly review and update beneficiary nominations on pension funds and insurance policies to reflect current intentions.
Seek Legal Advice: Engage with legal professionals to understand rights and obligations under both customary and civil law frameworks.

For trustees and administrators of pension funds, this case highlights the necessity of thorough investigations into the deceased’s personal circumstances to make informed and equitable decisions regarding benefit distributions.

In conclusion, the intersection of customary marriage laws and pension fund regulations in South Africa presents complex challenges. Both individuals and institutions must navigate these intricacies carefully to ensure that the rights and needs of all parties are respected and upheld.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.