Download PDF

South Africa Judgment

Labour Court Cape Town

Gomes v AMS Global South African (Pty) Ltd (C759/2018) [2020] ZALCCT 27 (21 October 2020)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The court found that the applicant was short paid his remuneration from February 2016 until July 2017, as evidenced by the documentation provided. The claim for severance pay was dismissed because the applicant resigned, and there was no entitlement to severance pay in such circumstances. The claim for leave pay was also dismissed due to lack of proof regarding entitlement and the last payment of leave. The court ordered the respondent to pay the applicant the unpaid remuneration as detailed in the annexure, converted to rands at the prevailing exchange rate for each month, together with interest at the prescribed rate. No order was made as to costs.

Court disposition

Default judgment granted in favour of the applicant for unpaid remuneration; claims for leave pay and severance pay dismissed.

Orders

  • The respondent is liable to the applicant for unpaid remuneration for the months and amounts set out in Schedule 'A'.
  • Within 14 days of receipt of this judgment, the respondent must pay the applicant unpaid remuneration for the period February 2016 until July 2017 as detailed in Annexure 'A', amounting to R1,197,268.00.
  • Interest accrued on the unpaid remuneration due at the end of each month listed in Annexure 'A', calculated at the prescribed rate of interest as determined from time to time under section 1(2)(b) of the Prescribed Rate of Interest Act, 55 of 1975.
  • No order as to costs.

02

Material facts

Parties

Fernando Avelilno Gomes

Applicant

AMS Global South African (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Amounts and remedies

  • Total Unpaid Remuneration: ZAR 1,197,268

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Default Judgment / Final

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The applicant claimed that he was short paid his salary by the respondent from February 2016 until his resignation at the end of July 2017. He provided evidence of the amounts owed and sought payment of outstanding leave pay and severance pay. He argued that his remuneration was paid in US dollars and should be converted to rands at the prevailing exchange rate for each month.
Respondent
The respondent did not oppose the application and made no appearance or submissions.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Basic Conditions of Employment Act 75 of 1997

    An employee is entitled to remuneration for work performed, and any shortfall must be paid by the employer.

  2. 02

    Prescribed Rate of Interest Act 55 of 1975

    Interest on unpaid remuneration is payable at the prescribed rate as determined under section 1(2)(b) of the Prescribed Rate of Interest Act.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The court found that the applicant was short paid his remuneration from February 2016 until July 2017, as evidenced by the documentation provided. The claim for severance pay was dismissed because the applicant resigned, and there was no entitlement to severance pay in such circumstances. The claim for leave pay was also dismissed due to lack of proof regarding entitlement and the last payment of leave. The court ordered the respondent to pay the applicant the unpaid remuneration as detailed in the annexure, converted to rands at the prevailing exchange rate for each month, together with interest at the prescribed rate. No order was made as to costs.

Obiter and limits

  • The court noted that the applicant failed to provide sufficient proof for his claim to leave pay and severance pay.
  • The judgment was handed down electronically due to the applicant's illness and the unopposed nature of the matter.

Court disposition

Default judgment granted in favour of the applicant for unpaid remuneration; claims for leave pay and severance pay dismissed.

  • The respondent is liable to the applicant for unpaid remuneration for the months and amounts set out in Schedule 'A'.
  • Within 14 days of receipt of this judgment, the respondent must pay the applicant unpaid remuneration for the period February 2016 until July 2017 as detailed in Annexure 'A', amounting to R1,197,268.00.
  • Interest accrued on the unpaid remuneration due at the end of each month listed in Annexure 'A', calculated at the prescribed rate of interest as determined from time to time under section 1(2)(b) of the Prescribed Rate of Interest Act, 55 of 1975.
  • No order as to costs.

Source and reliance status

Labour Court Cape Town

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Labour Court Cape Town

Judgment

[2020] ZALCCT 27

THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA,

HELD

AT CAPE TOWN

Not reportable

Case no:C759/2018

In the matter between:

FERNANDO

AVELILNO GOMES

Applicant

and

AMS GLOBAL SOUTH AFRICAN (PTY) LTD Respondent

Date of Judgment: This judgment was handed down electronically by circulation to the parties' legal representatives by email, publication on the Labour Court website and release to SAFLII. The date and time for handing down judgment is deemed to be 14h00 on 21 October 2020

Summary: (Default judgment - contractual claim)

JUDGMENT

LAGRANGE J

Introduction

[1] This default judgment application was postponed sine die on 6 March 2020, owing to the applicant's illness. It was previously struck off the roll on 29 October 2019 for lack of proper service on the respondent. Various requirements were laid down for the applicant, Mr FA Gomes ('Gomes'), to meet before it could be re-enrolled. These requirements concerned his employment dates, remuneration and status as an employee or director of various entities in the AMS group, and proof of his remuneration and any relevant contracts of employment. A subsequent directive required the applicant to quantify his claim with reference to the prevailing exchange rate when he claimed various payments were not made.

[2] Once the directives were complied with, the matter being unopposed, it was decided in chambers.

Claim

[3] Gomes is claiming the shortfall in his salary payments by the respondent since February 2016 until he resigned. His services terminated at the end of July 2017. On the evidence provided, I am satisfied that he was short paid remuneration due and owing to him by the respondent from February 2016 until the end of July 2017 in the amounts set out in Annexure "A" to this judgment.

[4] He also claims outstanding leave pay of 30 days and severance pay. As Gomes resigned there is no severance pay due to him and he has not provided any proof that he was entitled to a full month's leave pay. He also provided no proof of the last time he was paid leave or when his annual leave cycle began in terms of s 20 of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act 75 of 1997.

[5] His remuneration was paid in US dollars and accordingly, what he should have received each month in rands would have been determined by the prevailing exchange rate at the end of each month.

Order

[1] The Respondent is liable to the Applicant for his unpaid remuneration for the months and in the amounts set out in Schedule "A" attached hereto.

[2] Within 14 days of receipt of this judgment, the respondent must pay the applicant:

2.1 his unpaid remuneration for the period February 2016 until July 2017 as detailed in Annexure "A" hereto, amounting in total to R1,197268,00 (One million, one hundred and ninety-seven thousand and two­ hundred and sixty-eight rands), and

2.2 Interest accrued on the unpaid remuneration due at the end of each month listed in Annexure "A", calculated at the prescribed rate of interest as determined from time to time under section 1(2)(b) of the Prescribed Rate of Interest Act, 55 of 1975.

[3] No order is made as to costs.

Lagrange J

Judge of the Labour Court of South Africa

For the Applicant:

In person

For the Third Respondent:

No appearance

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Basic Conditions of Employment Act 75 of 1997

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Prescribed Rate of Interest Act 55 of 1975

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.