ECCAWU SA obo Shapu v Hilton Hotel Sandton (J4338/99) [2002] ZALC 193 (2 December 2002)

ECCAWU SA obo Shapu v Hilton Hotel Sandton (J4338/99) [2002] ZALC 193 (2 December 2002)

The court found that the settlement agreement between the applicant and respondent contained precise terms for reemployment and that the applicant had tendered his services on the agreed date. The respondent did not present the letter of appointment to the applicant, and its refusal to reemploy was based on misconduct that occurred after the agreement but before resumption of duties. However, the respondent did not plead that it was entitled to refuse compliance with the agreement on account of such misconduct. The court held that the agreement was enforceable and that the applicant was entitled to have the relevant terms made an order of court. The monetary obligation had been fulfilled,...

Citation
[2002] ZALC 193
Parties
Applicant: ECCAWU SA obo Mr T C Shapu; Respondent: Hilton Hotel Sandton
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 December 2002
Case Number
J4338/99
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application to Make Settlement Agreement an Order of Court Under Section 158(1)(c) of the Labour Relations Act
Outcome
Application granted. The relevant terms of the settlement agreement are made an order of court.
Judges
Landman
Legal Topics
Settlement Agreement Enforcement, Contract of Reemployment, Section 158 1 C Application, Misconduct Post Settlement
Labour Law Civil Procedure Settlement Agreement Enforcement Contract of Reemployment Section 158 1 C Application Misconduct Post Settlement

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ECCAWU SA obo Mr T C Shapu

Applicant

Hilton Hotel Sandton

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application to Make Settlement Agreement an Order of Court Under Section 158(1)(c) of the Labour Relations Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the settlement agreement between the parties should be made an order of court.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent complied with the obligation to reemploy the applicant under the settlement agreement.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant tendered his services for reemployment on 1 October 1999.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the settlement agreement between the applicant and respondent contained precise terms for reemployment and that the applicant had tendered his services on the agreed date. The respondent did not present the letter of appointment to the applicant, and its refusal to reemploy was based on misconduct that occurred after the agreement but before resumption of duties. However, the respondent did not plead that it was entitled to refuse compliance with the agreement on account of such misconduct. The court held that the agreement was enforceable and that the applicant was entitled to have the relevant terms made an order of court. The monetary obligation had been fulfilled,...

Court Disposition

Application granted. The relevant terms of the settlement agreement are made an order of court.

Orders

  • The respondent is ordered to reemploy the applicant with the same terms and conditions of employment as before.
  • The applicant is to be offered a position within the hotel of the same level as previously occupied.