A bruising high court ruling has thrown fresh scrutiny on how the Government Employees Pension Fund (GEPF) handled a multimillion-rand property dispute, with a judge finding that the fund cannot block access to key documents while fighting over money ultimately tied to the retirement savings of state workers.
In a judgment handed down in the North West High Court in Mahikeng on Wednesday, Acting Judge Marion Wessels ordered the GEPF to hand over unredacted investment management agreements to Isago @N12 Development and Isago Property Holdings, rejecting the fund’s attempt to tie disclosure to a R5-million penalty clause.
Isago granted leave to appeal
The court also granted Isago leave to appeal directly to the Supreme Court of Appeal and suspended an earlier order that had stopped monthly interest payments of about R2-million from flowing from an escrow account.
At the centre of the battle is a 2018 transaction in which the GEPF, acting through the Public Investment Corporation (PIC), acquired a 60% undivided share in land along the N12 for R510-million. Of that, R306-million was placed in escrow, with the interest being paid to Isago.
The GEPF wants the deal reviewed and set aside, arguing that the transaction was allegedly unlawful and irrational, and that it was based on flawed information and valuation problems. But Wessels found that Isago had been trying since June 2025 to obtain the full agreements governing the relationship between the GEPF and the PIC, documents the fund itself relied on in court papers.
“The GEPF is not doing Isago a favour by agreeing to produce the documents, it is fulfilling a legal obligation,” the judge said.
Proposed penalty ‘unfair’
In a stinging finding, Wessels said the proposed R5-million penalty for breaching confidentiality was “disproportionate” and added nothing of value beyond remedies the GEPF already had, including interdicts, contempt proceedings and damages claims.
“This casts doubt over the GEPF’s bona fides in introducing the penalty clause as a genuine protection measure,” he said.
For workers whose pensions sit inside the GEPF, the case matters because it pits the duty to protect public servants’ retirement money against the obligation to litigate fairly and transparently. The court made it clear that safeguarding pension assets does not entitle the fund to withhold central documents while pressing ahead for urgent relief.
Wessels also found that the earlier court process may have unfairly excluded Isago’s version before granting an interim interdict stopping the interest payments.
“The right of appeal is a fundamental aspect of the right of access to courts,” he said.
- The North West High Court ruled that the Government Employees Pension Fund (GEPF) must provide unredacted investment management agreements to Isago @N12 Development and Isago Property Holdings in a multimillion-rand property dispute.
- Acting Judge Marion Wessels rejected GEPF’s attempt to impose a R5-million penalty clause to block disclosure, deeming it disproportionate and questioning GEPF’s intentions.
- The dispute concerns a 2018 transaction where GEPF, through the Public Investment Corporation (PIC), acquired a 60% share in land along the N12 for R510-million, with ongoing interest payments to Isago from an escrow account.
- The court granted Isago leave to appeal directly to the Supreme Court of Appeal and reinstated the previously halted monthly R2-million interest payments.
- The judgment emphasizes that protecting pension assets does not justify withholding key documents and highlights the importance of fair and transparent litigation in disputes involving public servants’ retirement savings.
A bruising high court ruling has thrown fresh scrutiny on how the Government Employees Pension
In a judgment handed down in the
At the centre of the battle is a 2018 transaction in which the GEPF, acting through the Public Investment Corporation (PIC), acquired a 60% undivided share in land along the N12 for R510-million. Of that, R306-million was placed in escrow, with the interest being paid to Isago.
“
In a stinging finding, Wessels said the proposed R5-million penalty for breaching confidentiality was “disproportionate” and added nothing of value beyond remedies the GEPF already had, including interdicts, contempt proceedings and damages claims.
“
For workers whose pensions sit inside the GEPF, the case matters because it pits the duty to protect public servants’ retirement money against the obligation to litigate fairly and transparently.
Wessels also found that the earlier court process may have unfairly excluded Isago’s version before granting an interim interdict stopping the interest payments.
“
