Davidson v Emvest Asset Management (Pty) Ltd (JS 306/2012) [2013] ZALCJHB 255; (2014) 35 ILJ 171 (LC) (28 May 2013)

Davidson v Emvest Asset Management (Pty) Ltd (JS 306/2012) [2013] ZALCJHB 255; (2014) 35 ILJ 171 (LC) (28 May 2013)

The applicant was employed by the respondent and entitled to pro rata remuneration and accrued leave upon resignation. The respondent accepted the correctness of the amounts claimed but withheld payment, alleging a duty to deduct tax on Mauritian income. The evidence established that the respondent had no legal obligation to deduct or pay tax to SARS for income paid by a separate Mauritian entity. Any tax liability on Mauritian income is a matter between the applicant and SARS. The respondent failed to show any statutory provision permitting the deduction or any actual tax liability. The defence was found to be without merit, frivolous, and an abuse of process. The applicant is entitled...

Citation
[2013] ZALCJHB 255
Parties
Applicant: Chris Davidson; Respondent: Emvest Asset Management (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 May 2013
Case Number
JS 306/2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Applicant's claim for outstanding remuneration and accrued leave is upheld. Respondent is ordered to pay the claimed amounts and costs on an attorney and client scale.
Judges
Prinsloo
Legal Topics
Basic Conditions of Employment Act, Remuneration Claim, Leave Entitlement, Statutory Deductions, Punitive Costs
Labour Law Civil Procedure Basic Conditions of Employment Act Remuneration Claim Leave Entitlement Statutory Deductions Punitive Costs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chris Davidson

Applicant

Emvest Asset Management (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to payment of outstanding remuneration and accrued leave upon resignation.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent is legally permitted to withhold payment based on alleged tax liability under the Income Tax Act and section 34(1)(b) of the BCEA.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was employed by the respondent and entitled to pro rata remuneration and accrued leave upon resignation. The respondent accepted the correctness of the amounts claimed but withheld payment, alleging a duty to deduct tax on Mauritian income. The evidence established that the respondent had no legal obligation to deduct or pay tax to SARS for income paid by a separate Mauritian entity. Any tax liability on Mauritian income is a matter between the applicant and SARS. The respondent failed to show any statutory provision permitting the deduction or any actual tax liability. The defence was found to be without merit, frivolous, and an abuse of process. The applicant is entitled...

Court Disposition

Applicant's claim for outstanding remuneration and accrued leave is upheld. Respondent is ordered to pay the claimed amounts and costs on an attorney and client scale.

Orders

  • The respondent is to pay the applicant R17,775.87 in respect of outstanding and unpaid remuneration.
  • The respondent is to pay the applicant R63,248.73 in respect of accrued leave.