Ramusi v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Another

The applicant, a former Court Manager at the Bizana Magistrates’ Court, resigned from employment with the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services in August 2021. Following his resignation, his leave gratuity and pension benefits were not paid. The respondents alleged that payment was withheld due to an investigation into alleged financial misconduct by the applicant, with an alleged loss of R864 748.94. The applicant instituted application proceedings in August 2022 seeking payment of his leave gratuity, submission of pension withdrawal forms, and payment of pension benefits. On 25 October 2022, the High Court (per Majiki J) granted a consent order partially settling the dispute: the leave gratuity and part of the pension were paid, while R864 748.94 was frozen pending a counter-application by the first respondent. The first respondent failed to file the contemplated counter-application. The applicant thereafter sought, by way of a ‘notice of set down’, an order directing payment of the withheld pension amount and interest on his leave gratuity, without amending his notice of motion or filing supplementary affidavits.

The application was struck from the roll with costs, excluding the costs that had been reserved by the order of 25 October 2022.

The case underscores the peremptory nature of the Uniform Rules of Court in application proceedings and reaffirms that even where disputes evolve after partial settlement, litigants must properly redefine their cause of action through amended notices of motion and affidavits. It highlights the limits of judicial flexibility in procedural compliance and reinforces the centrality of notice and procedural fairness in South African civil litigation.