Opperman v Minister of Defence and Military Veterans

The appellant, a medical practitioner and member of the South African National Defence Force (SANDF), was promoted to the post of Inspector-General of the South African Military Health Service with effect from 1 April 2012. Although the post was classified as a common (senior management service) post and not an Occupational Specific Dispensation (OSD) post, the appellant was initially remunerated in accordance with the OSD applicable to medical officers. Almost a year later, the Department of Defence withdrew the OSD benefits, contending that the Inspector-General post did not qualify for OSD remuneration and that the payments made were overpayments recoverable from the appellant. The appellant approached the Gauteng Division of the High Court seeking declaratory relief that he had a contractual right to OSD benefits until 31 March 2014 and that their withdrawal constituted an unfair labour practice under s 23 of the Constitution. The High Court dismissed the application as premature due to failure to exhaust internal grievance procedures. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was dismissed with costs, limited to the costs of one counsel.

The case affirms that public sector remuneration must have a clear statutory or regulatory basis and that benefits conferred without lawful authority are unenforceable and recoverable. It underscores limits on contractual claims against the state where officials act ultra vires, particularly in the military context, and clarifies that mistaken payment of public funds does not give rise to enforceable labour or contractual rights.