Skip to content
Close Menu
ConvictionConviction
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

What's Hot

Even looting has levels: How racial capitalism shapes what the poor desire

October 22, 2026

Former coal miner qualifies for compensation for work-related back disease

October 22, 2026

Residential estates’ right to charge agents fees to sell properties not settled

October 22, 2026
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Trending
  • Even looting has levels: How racial capitalism shapes what the poor desire
  • Former coal miner qualifies for compensation for work-related back disease
  • Residential estates’ right to charge agents fees to sell properties not settled
  • Sales representative awarded eight months’ salary after sham retrenchment
  • Inconclusive DNA test does not bar inheritance by child born out of wedlock
  • Woman’s VW Golf, bought as a gift by her husband, stripped of engine at police compound
  • Electoral Court bars independent candidate who fell short of 50-voter threshold
  • Farmers allowed to vaccinate livestock against foot and mouth disease
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
ConvictionConviction
Sonneblom
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch
ConvictionConviction
Home » Rand Mutual compensation claim
Labour Law

Former coal miner qualifies for compensation for work-related back disease

The High Court in Johannesburg has ruled that former underground coal miner Tseke David Tseke qualifies for compensation for an occupational disease, ordering Rand Mutual Assurance to assess his permanent disablement.
Kennedy MudzuliBy Kennedy MudzuliOctober 22, 2026No Comments
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn WhatsApp Reddit Tumblr Email
Underground coal mining equipment illustrating the working conditions associated with a miner’s occupational disease compensation claim.
A former underground coal miner’s compensation claim was wrongly rejected by Rand Mutual Assurance, the High Court in Johannesburg found.
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email
  • The court found that Tseke’s lumbar disc disease qualifies as an occupational disease under the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act (COIDA).
  • Rand Mutual Assurance was unable to challenge the legal presumption that Tseke’s disease was caused by his work.
  • The insurer has been ordered to assess his level of permanent disablement and cover his legal costs.

After years of rejected claims, Tseke David Tseke, a former underground coal miner, has established his entitlement to compensation for his back condition. However, the court has not yet determined how severe his permanent disablement is or how much compensation he will receive. That assessment still needs to be completed.

Tseke began training as a miner in 1998 and worked underground at Tavistock Colliery from July 2003. His duties included breaking coal with a heavy hammer, shovelling coal, clearing conveyors and travelling underground in a modified vehicle. His work also involved prolonged sitting, heavy lifting, repetitive movements and exposure to vibration.

Medical records showed a history of lower back pain dating back to 1999. In 2006, doctors diagnosed a lumbar disc herniation, with one doctor warning that heavy lifting, pushing and vibration could worsen his condition.

In June 2010, Tseke underwent surgery to remove the damaged L4/L5 disc and replace it with an artificial disc. He later returned to work but eventually left mining and was medically retrenched in March 2013.

Insurer rejected compensation claim

Rand Mutual Assurance received Tseke’s original compensation claim in November 2010 but rejected it in 2017, saying there had been no qualifying workplace accident. In January 2022, Tseke filed a new claim, arguing that his condition should be recognised as an occupational disease rather than an injury from a single incident.

The insurer rejected the claim again in February 2022. It maintained that the disc damage was more likely caused by a specific incident than by his exposure to workplace conditions over time.

Tseke challenged the decision. A tribunal held 11 hearings between March and August 2023 before dismissing his objection in a ruling dated 6 December 2023. However, the tribunal did not explain why it rejected his claim, prompting him to appeal to the High Court.

Tribunal failed to explain its decision

Acting Judge N Mzuzu and Acting Judge J Roos found that while the tribunal had summarised the evidence and arguments, it did not explain its findings or address the differing medical opinions.

The judges said tribunals must give reasons that allow affected employees to understand why their claims were rejected and decide whether to appeal. They also found that the tribunal had failed to properly consider the workplace risks associated with Tseke’s duties.

Workplace risks supported compensation claim

The judges determined that Tseke’s lumbar disc herniation qualifies as an occupational musculoskeletal disease under the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act 130 of 1993. The evidence showed that his work involved heavy lifting, repetitive movements, awkward postures, prolonged sitting and exposure to vibration.

The court rejected the insurer’s reliance on vibration measurements from 2012, finding that those readings did not reflect the conditions Tseke experienced earlier in his career underground. The judges also pointed out that vibration was not the only risk. Several aspects of Tseke’s job could have contributed to his back problem.

Under Section 66 of the Act, certain occupational diseases are presumed to have arisen from employment when the required workplace risks are established, unless the contrary is proved. The court found that this presumption applied to Tseke’s case and that Rand Mutual Assurance had failed to rebut it.

The judges therefore concluded that he had established his entitlement to compensation. However, they did not determine the extent of his permanent disablement because further medical and occupational assessments were needed.

Insurer must assess permanent disablement

The court set aside the tribunal’s decision and ordered Rand Mutual Assurance to obtain reports from a suitable medical specialist and a professional with experience in underground coal mining.

The reports must assess Tseke’s permanent disablement and explain the consequences of his condition in relation to his previous work. The assessment must be completed within six months of the order. The reports must be provided to Tseke and his legal representatives within 30 days of their receipt.

Rand Mutual Assurance was also ordered to pay his legal costs, including qualifying costs for expert witnesses.

Conviction.co.za

Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.

COIDA Compensation claims mineworkers occupational disease Rand Mutual Assurance
Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Telegram Email
Kennedy Mudzuli

Multiple award-winner with passion for news and training young journalists. Founder and editor of Conviction.co.za

Related Posts

Sales representative awarded eight months’ salary after sham retrenchment

October 22, 2026

Transport agency criticised for seeking to invalidate appointments that no longer existed

October 20, 2026

Protracted reinstatement battle meant military colonel claimed damages three years too late

October 16, 2026
Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

Prove your humanity: 2   +   3   =  

Subscribe to our newsletter:
Top Posts

Your driving licence at the gate: What estates can actually legally scan

Sponsor: My Estate LifeSeptember 6, 2026

Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

January 17, 2025

Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

December 31, 2024

Between a rock and a foul-smelling place

November 27, 2024
Don't Miss
Opinion
5 Mins Read

Even looting has levels: How racial capitalism shapes what the poor desire

By Sandile MemelaOctober 22, 20265 Mins Read

An image contrasting South Africans looting groceries with French people taking luxury goods raises uncomfortable questions about racial inequality, consumerism and a system that encourages people to seek personal gain rather than challenge the structures that exclude them.

Former coal miner qualifies for compensation for work-related back disease

October 22, 2026

Residential estates’ right to charge agents fees to sell properties not settled

October 22, 2026

Sales representative awarded eight months’ salary after sham retrenchment

October 22, 2026
Stay In Touch
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • WhatsApp
Demo
About Us
About Us

Helping South Africans to navigate the legal landscape; providing accessible legal information; and giving a voice to those seeking justice.

Facebook X (Twitter) YouTube WhatsApp Twitch RSS
Latest posts

Your driving licence at the gate: What estates can actually legally scan

Sponsor: My Estate LifeSeptember 6, 2026

Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

January 17, 2025

Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

December 31, 2024
OUR PICKS

LPC warns against unregulated legal services, clarifies legal consultant ruling

October 17, 2026

The R400,000 award for ‘white trash’ and ‘dumb people’ insults that cost a woman her home

October 21, 2026

FNB customer demands R15,100 refund after fraudsters drain account using stolen phone

October 17, 2026
© 2026 Conviction.
  • Home
  • Buy Now
  • Law & Justice

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Powered by
Necessary cookies enable essential site features like secure log-ins and consent preference adjustments. They do not store personal data.
None
Functional cookies support features like content sharing on social media, collecting feedback, and enabling third-party tools.
None
Analytical cookies track visitor interactions, providing insights on metrics like visitor count, bounce rate, and traffic sources.
None
Advertisement cookies deliver personalized ads based on your previous visits and analyze the effectiveness of ad campaigns.
None
Unclassified cookies are cookies that we are in the process of classifying, together with the providers of individual cookies.
None
Powered by