Kaltwasser v Isambulela Group Administrator (Pty) Ltd (JS 635/10, JS 359/11) [2013] ZALCJHB 354 (7 February 2014)

Kaltwasser v Isambulela Group Administrator (Pty) Ltd (JS 635/10, JS 359/11) [2013] ZALCJHB 354 (7 February 2014)

The applicant's claim for backdated salary increases failed because the contract clause on which he relied was inserted without the respondent's informed consent, and the respondent's director signed under a material and reasonable mistake. The applicant did not draw attention to the amendment, and the circumstances did not justify reliance on caveat subscriptor. The claim for salary lost due to reduction in February 2010 was settled fully and finally at the CCMA, and could not be revived. The automatically unfair dismissal claim failed because the most probable cause of dismissal was the applicant's misconduct and refusal to provide the original contract, not his referral of disputes....

Citation
[2013] ZALCJHB 354
Parties
Applicant: Johannes Alwyn Kaltwasser; Respondent: Isambulela Group Administrator (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 February 2014
Case Number
JS 635/10, JS 359/11
Procedural Posture
Trial Judgment / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
All of the applicant's claims are dismissed. Costs are awarded against the applicant.
Judges
Lagrange
Legal Topics
Automatically Unfair Dismissal, Contractual Claim for Unpaid Increases, Justus Error, Caveat Subscriptor, Settlement of Ccma Dispute
Labour Law Civil Procedure Automatically Unfair Dismissal Contractual Claim for Unpaid Increases Justus Error Caveat Subscriptor Settlement of Ccma Dispute

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Johannes Alwyn Kaltwasser

Applicant

Isambulela Group Administrator (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Trial Judgment / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was contractually entitled to backdated salary increases for 2007, 2008, and 2009.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's claim for salary lost due to reduction in February 2010 was settled at the CCMA and could be revived.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's dismissal was automatically unfair in terms of s 187(1) of the LRA due to his referral of disputes.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's claim for backdated salary increases failed because the contract clause on which he relied was inserted without the respondent's informed consent, and the respondent's director signed under a material and reasonable mistake. The applicant did not draw attention to the amendment, and the circumstances did not justify reliance on caveat subscriptor. The claim for salary lost due to reduction in February 2010 was settled fully and finally at the CCMA, and could not be revived. The automatically unfair dismissal claim failed because the most probable cause of dismissal was the applicant's misconduct and refusal to provide the original contract, not his referral of disputes....

Court Disposition

All of the applicant's claims are dismissed. Costs are awarded against the applicant.

Orders

  • The applicant's claim for backdated salary increases in 2007, 2008, and 2009 is dismissed.
  • The applicant's claim for salary lost due to reduction from 1 February 2010 until termination is dismissed as settled at the CCMA.