Image created by AI

Widow's Decade-Long Battle Over Death Benefit Heads to Constitutional Court

Published November 13, 2024
3 months ago

In a legal contest that has spanned ten years, Tshifhiwa Shembry Mutsila is poised to present her case before the Constitutional Court this Tuesday. The core of the dispute revolves around the contentious sharing of a death benefit, which arose following the death of her husband, Takalani Emmanuel Mutsila, in 2012.





A saga that threads through family, customary laws, and the intricate architecture of the South African legal system, Ms. Mutsila's quest for justice began when the Municipal Gratuity Fund deemed another woman, Dipuo Masete, and her two children as additional beneficiaries of Takalani's death benefit. Masete claimed to have been customarily married to Takalani, ushering in the complex issue of dual beneficiaries - the widow and purported mistress.


Mutsila, along with her five children, were the nominated beneficiaries, and she promptly filed a claim, encountering resistance when the fund allocated a substantial share to Masete and her children, foregoing an equal or fair split that Mutsila had anticipated. In 2014, the initial distribution saw Mutsila receiving only 22.5% with Masete taking a higher proportion of 27.5%, while the rest was divided among the children based on various factors including age.


Determined to challenge this outcome, Mutsila engaged the services of a private investigator whose findings spurred on a custody challenge by Malema Mphafudi against Masete, casting doubts on the paternity of her children and her asserted marriage with Takalani. This discovery led to an initial victory for Mutsila when the adjudicator decided to set aside the fund's decision, compelling the release of R300,000 to her to clear a housing loan.


Despite the High Court supporting the adjudicator's decision and acknowledging that the fund had erred in its duties, the Supreme Court of Appeal differed in its judgment, sparking further dispute. The crux of the matter lay in whether Masete and her children were practically dependent on the deceased, a question that the SCA felt had been addressed adequately by the fund.


In the latest step, Mutsila contends that both the fund's and the SCA's assessments are errant, failing to recognize critical elements like financial support and the long-term necessities of her children. The Constitutional Court now faces the task of reconciling these complex threads to deliver a judgement that not only impacts the lives of both parties involved but also sets a precedent for how death benefits are adjudicated, and the rights of beneficiaries and dependents under the scrutiny of section 37C of the Pension Funds Act.


Leave a Comment

Rate this article:

Please enter email address.
Looks good!
Please enter your name.
Looks good!
Please enter a message.
Looks good!
Please check re-captcha.
Looks good!
Leave the first review