Medscheme, Bonitas set for high court showdown next month

The showdown between medical scheme administrator Medscheme and Bonitas Medical Fund over alleged improper procurement practices at Bonitas is set to be heard next month in the High Court in Johannesburg.

Medscheme, a subsidiary of JSE-listed AfroCentric and the administrator for 14 medical aid schemes serving over four million members, lodged an urgent application on 15 December 2025 to suspend or terminate certain requests for proposals (RFPs) issued by Bonitas in July 2025.

AfroCentric share price

The application cites concerns about ethical, contractual and statutory obligations to the scheme and its members.

CMS inquiry and forensic investigation

The concerns were heightened by media reports alleging governance failures and procurement improprieties involving senior Bonitas executives and trustees.

This led to the Registrar of the Council for Medical Schemes (CMS) initiating a Section 43 inquiry in February 2025 that involved a request for certain information from Bonitas for thorough analysis.

The CMS announced on 3 November 2025 it had concluded its inquiry and that the findings, after a comprehensive review of the submitted information, “suggest the allegations warrant further investigation”.

The CMS said it had therefore decided to initiate a forensic investigation to examine the full scope of the claims and formulate appropriate recommendations.

It has not yet announced the outcome.

Medscheme said it sought to resolve its concerns amicably, requesting written assurances from Bonitas that no RFP awards would be made before the CMS investigation is concluded, but these requests were declined.

This prompted Medscheme to lodge its high court application.

Flawed procurement allegations

Medscheme is, among other things, seeking in its court application an order directing Bonitas to suspend any ongoing tender procurement processes related to administration and managed care services under the RFPs, pending the final outcome of the forensic investigation by the CMS.

It is also seeking to interdict Bonitas from taking further steps to negotiate, finalise, or implement any RFP awards pending the final determination of its court application.

Despite the CMS’s forensic investigation and Medscheme’s urgent application, Bonitas on 29 January 2026 announced the outcome of its RFP process to appoint service providers for the provision of administration and managed care services.

Medscheme said on Wednesday that its application is set to be heard on 3 March 2025, although the date may move by a week or two and is expected to be set down for hearing during March 2025.

Read:
The best medical aid in South Africa [Feb 2025]
Sanlam looks to acquire major stake in AfroCentric [Oct 2022]

Gerald van Wyk, CEO of AfroCentric and a board member of Medscheme, said that where credible allegations of unlawfulness exist and regulatory scrutiny has been triggered, “prudence, legality and fairness demand that implementation pauses until those processes have run their course”.

“Once the new contracts are implemented, the prejudice to Bonitas and its members flowing from a fatally flawed procurement process becomes irreversible.

“A claim for damages cannot retrospectively restore the integrity of a compromised tender process, nor can it unwind the operational disruption and instability that will result,” he said.

Van Wyk made a number of claims, including that whistleblowers have provided corroborating documentary evidence supporting Medscheme’s argument that the awarding of the Bonitas contract in 2024 was unlawful and procedurally tainted.

He said the whistleblower evidence includes extensive email trails and supporting documents, which Medscheme alleges show predetermination of outcomes and efforts by scheme insiders to exclude Medscheme from Bonitas’s procurement processes.

Van Wyk added that documents provided by whistleblowers significantly bolster Medscheme’s contention that Bonitas’s RFP processes were intentionally compromised from the outset, and procurement outcomes predetermined prior to the issuance of certain RFPs and aligned to preferred bidders and their associated entities.

He further claimed that cyber-forensic analysis confirms documents relied upon by Private Health Administrators (PHA) and provided to the court were altered and fraudulent.

Read: Selecting the right medical aid: Essential factors to guide your decision [Sep 2024]

Van Wyk said all claims by Bonitas about poor performance by Medscheme are contradicted by the scheme’s own reporting as well as verifiable data.

He claimed that, on awarding a tender, the successful bidder promptly employed or offered to employ all of the 23 existing staff members of AfroCentric Distribution, despite Bonitas’s claims of poor performance.

Van Wyk claimed the evidence shows that certain former executives of AfroCentric and/or Medscheme were involved in establishing competing initiatives while still employed, constituting alleged breaches of fiduciary duties.

Bonitas responds

Lee Callakoppen, principal officer of Bonitas Medical Fund, confirmed that Medscheme is the current service provider to Bonitas for administrative and managed care services for all Bonitas options other than the BonCap option.

Callakoppen said the current agreements governing these services ends “through the effluxion of time” on 31 May 2026.

Listen:
Navigating SA’s medical aid landscape [Nov 2025]
What to know when choosing a medical aid [Sep 2025]

He added that Medscheme is seeking to interdict tenders 3 and 4 pending the finalisation of an inspection by the CMS Registrar, which has yet to commence, into the processes followed in awarding tenders 1 and 2, and pending a postulated review premised on the CMS inspection.

However, Callakoppen said the processes and outcomes followed in the awarding of tenders 1 and 2 are completely unrelated to, and have no bearing on, tenders 3 and 4.

Callakoppen said Medscheme’s application is therefore clearly unsustainable and also lacks any substantiated grounds to justify the granting of an interim interdict.

He said the tender processes in respect of tenders 3 and 4 have been concluded, with tender 3 awarded to Momentum for administration services for all options, and tender 4 to PHA for managed care services for all options referred to in the terms of reference.

‘Ulterior motives’ by Medscheme

He added that the award of tenders 3 and 4, and the conclusion of binding agreements with the service providers, means “the relief sought by Medscheme is accordingly moot”.

“The timing of the application, the intentional conflation of the issues relating to tenders 1 and 2, as well as the reliance placed thereon as grounds for interdicting tenders 3 and 4, are all part of Medscheme’s ulterior purpose, which is to delay and prevent the appointment of new service providers in terms of the pending tenders, and therefore it seeks to continue thereby to indefinitely reap the financial benefits emanating from its position as the existing service provider,” he said.

Callakoppen also claimed Medscheme’s application lacked urgency and that any urgency was self-created.

He noted that tender 1 was awarded in 2022 and tender 2 in 2024, and if Medscheme had any grounds to seek relief, it should have done so two to four years ago.

Callakoppen said Bonitas is confident proper tender processes, which have been independently verified, were followed in respect of the tenders.

Read: Bonitas unveils 2026 product range: Affordable, innovative and member-centric [Sep 2025]

He said the crux of Medscheme’s contention is that Bonitas and its members will suffer harm if a new service provider “is ever appointed” to render administration and managed care services.

Callakoppen said the only way to avert any harm, according to Medscheme, is for Bonitas to retain Medscheme as a service provider, preferably indefinitely, to avoid any disruption.

“The harm apprehended by Medscheme is unreasonable and unfounded.

“It also seeks to usurp the power of the Registrar and CMS (for its own gain) by asserting that it should as the service provider in perpetuity to safeguard Bonitas and its members.

“Medscheme simply does not have the power or authority to do so,” he said.

Follow Moneyweb’s in-depth finance and business news on WhatsApp here.