In a significant development for the South African healthcare sector, the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA), has dismissed the Council for Medical Schemes (CMS) and the Registrar for Medical Schemes’ reconsideration application against the Board of Healthcare Funders (BHF) with costs.
At the signing of the National Health Insurance (NHI) Bill into law, the President asserted that medical schemes were elitist and excluded the majority of the population. However, it is important to note that for many years, medical schemes have actively sought exemptions to provide low-cost benefit options (LCBOs) that would enable more citizens to access medical aid coverage. Despite these efforts, medical schemes face significant regulatory hurdles that prevent them from offering these more inclusive options.
The court’s decision follows the raising of significant concerns by BHF in a letter to the CMS and the registrar, which highlighted key conflicts related to hostility towards medical schemes; unnecessary litigation; delays in developing legal frameworks for low-cost benefit options (LCBOs); ineffective appeal processes; the legality of CMS’s regulatory actions; the influence of the National Health Insurance (NHI) Bill on CMS policies; and the lack of review of Prescribed Minimum Benefits (PMBs) for 24 years.
Mr Charlton Murove, Head of Research at BHF, said that while the organisation respects the court’s decision, it is unfortunate that a personal cost order against the registrar was not awarded, and that the regulator continues to delay the matter.
“These delays divert valuable resources, and hinder progress on an issue that is critical to both the South African healthcare industry, and the health of citizens in need of essential services,” added Murove.
The CMS has since filed the Rule 30A affidavit and the supplementary record. The BHF legal team is currently studying these documents for purposes of moving forward with the main review application, where its members will be updated.
To this end, BHF remains committed to ensuring a fair and effective regulatory environment for the South African healthcare sector.
“We, as the BHF, will continue to advocate for the interests of our members and the millions of beneficiaries they serve, striving to create a healthcare system that is equitable, transparent, and capable of meeting the needs of all South Africans.
“This court case is crucial in the context of the National Health Insurance (NHI) as it highlights the necessity of reducing the burden on the state while it prepares for the implementation of NHI, ensuring access to quality healthcare for everyone is essential,” concluded Murove.
