The High Court application brought by Medscheme against Bonitas Medical Fund, which was due to be heard on 3 March, has been removed from the roll.
Bonitas confirmed that the matter could not proceed in the High Court in Johannesburg because Medscheme’s replying affidavit was filed out of time and remains incomplete. According to the scheme, Medscheme was obliged to file its replying affidavit by 12 February but did not meet the deadline. Medscheme’s replying affidavit was signed and dated in Johannesburg on 14 February.
Read: Tensions rise as Bonitas and Medscheme clash ahead of court showdown
Medscheme said the application was removed from the urgent roll by agreement between the parties because the matter is not yet ripe for hearing. According to the administrator, the case raises complex issues of fact and law, the papers run to more than 1 200 pages, and the hearing is expected to require two full days of argument.
In light of this, the parties agreed the matter should not proceed on the ordinary urgent roll but instead be specially allocated for a two-day hearing by the Acting Judge President of the Gauteng Division of the High Court, Judge Aubrey Ledwaba, who is also the division’s Deputy Judge President.
“Once the matter is considered ripe for hearing, the parties will approach the office of the Deputy Judge President to specially allocate the hearing of the matter as prescribed in terms of the practice directives of the court,” Medscheme stated.
Medscheme emphasised that it has not withdrawn the application, and the matter was not removed because of lack of urgency. It maintains the dispute remains urgent and said its attorneys are taking the necessary steps to ensure what it described as a speedy and orderly resolution.
Bonitas further indicated that certain interlocutory issues remain unresolved. The scheme stated that the Acting Judge President has directed that the outstanding interlocutory matters must first be finalised before Medscheme may approach him for a possible date allocation.
The removal from the roll means the substantive dispute over Bonitas’ procurement and appointment processes will not be heard until those preliminary issues are resolved and a new date is secured.
Background to the dispute
The application stems from Medscheme’s urgent court bid launched in December 2025 to halt the implementation of Bonitas’ July 2025 Request for Proposal (RFP) awards.
Medscheme sought to interdict the implementation of the scheme’s newly awarded administration contract to Momentum Health and managed-care contract to Private Health Administrators (PHA), pending the outcome of a section 44 investigation by the Council for Medical Schemes (CMS).
The CMS probe relates to earlier procurement decisions, including Bonitas’ 2022 appointment of PHA for its BonCap option and the 2024 award to Agile Business Solutions for marketing and distribution services.
Read: Bonitas’ dispute with Medscheme heads to court
Medscheme has argued in court papers that the various tenders form part of a broader pattern involving the same decision-makers and alleged governance concerns. It contends that the July 2025 RFP awards should not be viewed in isolation and has sought to pause implementation while regulatory scrutiny runs its course.
Bonitas, in its answering affidavit, has rejected that characterisation. The scheme has maintained that the earlier tenders cited by Medscheme are unrelated to the later RFP awards, which it says were independently verified and lawfully concluded. It has further argued that contracts with the successful bidders have already been signed and that the relief sought is moot.
PHA has also opposed the application, disputing both the factual basis and the legal foundation of Medscheme’s claims and warning that halting implementation would disrupt essential services to members.
Who is affected?
At the centre of the dispute is the planned transition of Bonitas’ administration from Medscheme to Momentum Health, scheduled to take effect on 1 June.
Bonitas has previously stated that it remains financially sound and focused on ensuring a stable operational transition in the best interests of its members. It has argued that any delay to the implementation of the new contracts could prejudice members and service providers.
Read: Bonitas-Medscheme split: what the CMS probe means for members
Medscheme, for its part, has contended that proceeding with the implementation while governance questions are under regulatory investigation risks longer-term harm that may be difficult to reverse.
With the matter now removed from the roll, the transition process appears set to continue unless and until the interlocutory issues are resolved and the application is re-enrolled.
The timing of any fresh hearing date will depend on the finalisation of the outstanding procedural issues and the allocation of a new date by the Acting Judge President.
After all the hype they couldnt even submit the affidavit on time. and the high priced laywers couldnt warn them? This is pathetic.