
Listeriosis class action settlement offered but many victims still unknown
Tiger Brands confirmed on Monday that a settlement has been reached in a class action suit related to the 2017 listeriosis outbreak.
A Tiger Brands facility in Germiston that is believed to have handled contaminated products. Picture: Gallo Images / Netwerk24 /Felix Dlangamandla
Tiger Brands has presented a settlement offer to the victims of the deadly 2017 listeriosis outbreak.
A strain of listeria killed 218 people and affected at least another 820 who consumed contaminated processed food.
National Institute for Communicable Diseases (NICD) investigations tracked the strain to a Tiger Brands facility in Polokwane, as well as distribution facility in Germiston.
Eligible claimants
The class action fight for the claimants has been pursued by two firms, namely Richard Spoor Inc and LHL Attorneys.
The firms praised the peer-reviewed work of the NICD, spearheaded by Minister of Health Aaron Motsoaledi.
'These findings have since been confirmed by world-renowned epidemiologists, including Tiger Brands' own experts,' the case attorneys said in a joint statement on Monday.
The claimants covered in this case are those who contracted the genotype L1-SL6-ST6-CT4148 of Listeria monocytogenes (ST6), as well mothers of the children affected.
Additionally, the legal dependants of any household breadwinners who died of ST6 listeriosis, as well as adults whose legal dependants contracted the illness, are also eligible.
The details of the offer have been sent to the claimants' attorneys, but they have not been publicly disclosed to protect their interests.
Liability still to be proven
This is just the first of a two-step process where the company's liability must still be determined by the courts, only after which compensation can be awarded.
'Before any settlement can be finalised, it must be presented to the High Court, which will determine its fairness as the ultimate guardian of class member interests,' confirmed the attorneys, who labelled the settlement offer an 'effective admission of liability'.
The food manufacturers' statement contradicted that position, but stressed that they had adequate product liability insurance cover.
'Only if Tiger Brands is found to be liable will the issue of causation arise, in the second stage of the class action, as well as an assessment of compensation payable to qualifying claimants for damages suffered,' the company stated on Monday.
'The offer is subject to certain conditions and has been made without admission of liability and in full and final settlement of the claims of the claimants,' Tiger Brands explained.
Both Tiger Brands and the legal representatives state that this will take at least several weeks to resolve, but they remain committed to the process.
'Tiger Brands' renewed and demonstrable commitment to the victims will ultimately lead to a comprehensive resolution of all claims,' stated the attorneys.
Importance of food safety
The firms, as well as the NICD, have been praised by the Department of Health for placing 'the sufferings of the victims' at the forefront of the fight.
Many of those affected by the outbreak over seven years ago have not come forward, but the department and the NICD are working to assist the attorneys in locating potential claimants.
The DoH said the class action highlighted the importance of sticking to guidelines around the handling of processed food.
'Food safety and hygiene practices remain crucial for public health, preventing foodborne illnesses, reducing food waste and avoiding costly food recalls,' stated the department.
Those affected by listeriosis who were not part of the class action may still contact Richard Spoor Inc or LHL Attorneys for further information.
NOW READ: Not Rasta, but Tiger Brands: Here's who's behind those spaza shop murals
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

IOL News
7 days ago
- IOL News
R9. 1 million spent on NHI legal battles, says Motsoaledi
Health Minister Aaron Motsoaledi says his department is facing seven legal cases challenging the NHI and National Health Acts. Image: GCIS Health Minister Aaron Motsoaledi disclosed on Wednesday that R9.1 million has been spent to date on litigation involving the National Health Insurance (NHI) Act. Motsoaledi said his department was facing seven legal cases, which included five over the NHI and two on the National Health Act. 'From October 2023 when the first counsel was briefed, the total amount paid is R9,696,679,99. There is no pending financial liability for any cost product since the single judgment that came out so far is under appeal,' he said. Motsoaledi made the comment during the question and answer session in the National Assembly. DA MP Michele Clarke had enquired whether Motsoaledi was responding about the total expenses incurred regarding litigation involving the National Health Insurance Act, including the estimated financial liability for any adverse cost order. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading Motsoaledi said the department was using the same legal team to fend off the legal challenges. 'We have hired a team that deals with them. It is five senior counsel and seven junior counsel.' Clarke asked about the justification to pay the large legal team when hospitals cannot afford to pay for patients or overtime for doctors. She noted that President Cyril Ramaphosa had a small legal team compared to the Health Minister. In response, Motsoaledi said their legal team was appropriate. 'The President's (legal team) is for only one case, not seven. We are sued for seven cases and that is why this amount of money is for those who have been involved in litigation.' He indicated that when the cases increase, the department will increase the number of legal counsels to match them. He noted that the R9m paid for lawyers to defend the cases was a lot of money when doctors were not employed. 'You here honourable members, who are subsidised to stay on private medical aid for R70 billion, Why don't you have the heart to believe that money must go to help the poor?' He also stated that South Africans on medical aid get tax credits to the tune of R33 billion. 'It's R103 billion rand that goes on to 14% of the population. Then you come here to me and complain about R9 (million),' he said. 'If you are not on private medical aids and being heavily subsidised, there won't be any litigation because we won't be asking for NHI. South Africans will be equal so please go and think about that very carefully.' ACDP MP Steven Swart said litigation was expected regarding the controversial NHI Act. 'We understand the need for five seniors, seven juniors, given the constitutional arguments and the ACDP, like many others, has serious concerns about the constitutionality of the Act,' he said. Swart also said the cost of litigation against the department was extremely worrisome and took away much needed health services, in particular medical legal claims, which as at last year was R75 billion and the legal cost would be hundreds of millions of rands. 'What is being done to reduce the number of medical legal claims against the department, which besides the fraudulent claims, we know there are many fraudulent claims, is often caused by overworked doctors and nurses who work under severe pressure and may act negligently in that regard,' he asked in a supplementary question. Motsoaledi said the original question was about the NHI and Swart was asking about medical legal claims. 'Medical legal worries us, and you are correct, it takes money away from the health care system. Fraud was found to be the biggest part of this.' Cape Times


Eyewitness News
7 days ago
- Eyewitness News
MPs question Motsoaledi spending R9 million to hire 12 counsel to defend NHI
JOHANNESBURG - Members of Parliament (MPs) have questioned Minister of Health Aaron Motsoaledi over the hiring of 12 counsel at a cost of R9 million to defend the National Health Insurance (NHI). But Motsoaledi has defended the expenditure, saying litigation comes at a high cost and the department needs the expertise of senior counsel as it defends its flagship universal healthcare policy. The minister was briefing the National Assembly as part of the social cluster in Parliament on Wednesday. Motsoaledi said his department is facing several lawsuits challenging the NHI as well as the National Health Act. He justified the expenditure, saying litigation in its nature is costly to defend. Some of the organisations taking the department to court include the South African Medical Association (SAMA) and the Board of Healthcare Funders (BHF). "Those who have been involved in litigation will know how expensive senior counsel is. It's not us. So, it's seven cases, seven junior counsel, and five senior counsel." President Cyril Ramaphosa is also facing his own NHI-related legal challenge after the court ruled that his decision to sign the act was reviewable, ordering him to provide the record of his decision. He is appealing the ruling.


The Citizen
28-05-2025
- The Citizen
Health minister defends nearly R10 million legal spend on NHI court battles
Motsoaledi says there would not be a need for litigation if members of parliament didn't enjoy heavy subsidies on private medical aid and if NHI were a reality. The Department of Health has spent R9.7 million on legal fees defending the National Health Insurance (NHI) fund and the NHI Act. This is according to Health Minister Aaron Motsoaledi, who was addressing questions during the Social Services Cluster question-and-answer session in Parliament on Wednesday. Mostoaledi said there are overall seven cases against the controversial fund, which is designed to give all South Africans access to quality healthcare paid for by taxpayers. Five of these cases involve the fund itself, and two involve the act. R9.7 million in legal fees 'We are using the same team of lawyers, and so we might not be able to separate the two. So, we have hired a team that deals with them,' Motsoaledi said. 'It's five senior counsel and seven junior counsel, and from October 2023, when the first counsel was briefed, the total amount paid is R9 696 679.99. There is no pending financial liability for any cost order since the single judgement that came out so far is under appeal. Mostsoaledi was addressing Democratic Alliance (DA) member of parliament (MP) Michele Clarke, who asked what the total litigation expenses incurred to date regarding the act are. ALSO READ: Court rules president must explain how he decided to sign NHI Bill into law 'I would like to ask the minister how he justifies paying such a large legal team, given that hospitals cannot afford food for patients or overtime for doctors, and given that even the president has a legal team of only about a third of the health minister,' Clarke asked Motsoaledi. The minister said the department regarded the size of the team as appropriate and that the president is only sued for one case, not seven. He said they didn't determine the amount and that those who have been involved in litigation will know how expensive senior counsel is. 'When the cases increase, we increase the number because we have to match them.' MP's medical aid subsidies Motsoaledi also said the millions spent defending the NHI were nothing compared to the billions in medical aid subsidies that MPs enjoy. 'You here, honourable members, are subsidised to stay on private medical aid for R70 billion; why don't we have the heart to believe that money must go to help the poor? 'It doesn't stop there; any South African who's on a medical aid, including you, gets tax credits to the tune of R33 billion… Then you come here to me and complain about R9 million; are you not trying to hide things here?' ALSO READ: Motsoaledi announces 1 650 new healthcare jobs and R1.3bn to be spent on hospital equipment He said if MPs were not on private medical aids and being heavily subsidised, there would not be any need for litigation, and the department would not be asking for NHI. 'South Africans would be equal, so please go and think about that very carefully.' Call for decisiveness In response, ActionSA's Dr Tebogo Letlape asked the minister why he doesn't take away the subsidies and tax benefits since they are under his purview. Furthermore, he asked why the Medical Schemes Act and the NHI Act exist separately. 'Why can't there be decisiveness in terms of doing what needs to be done, where the new proposal replaces the existing proposal? Why are we creating two parallel mechanisms? Where's the courage to merge the two?' Letlape asked. Motsoaledi said he understood that Letlape had always advocated for abolishing medical aid and replacing it with the NHI since he was the president of the Health Professions Council of South Africa. 'That's the decision this house can take if you have the heart to take it,' the minister said, addressing the MPs. NOW READ: Over 8 000 SA healthcare jobs lost – and more could follow – after US Pepfar aid cuts