Makate v Joosub N.O and Another (57882/2019) [2022] ZAGPPHC 55; [2022] 2 All SA 226 (GP) (7 February 2022)

Makate v Joosub N.O and Another (57882/2019) [2022] ZAGPPHC 55; [2022] 2 All SA 226 (GP) (7 February 2022)

The court held that the CEO's determination of compensation for Makate was reviewable under the narrow standard applicable to expert valuers: whether the decision was made honestly, in good faith, and with the judgment of a reasonable person. The CEO failed to exercise his mandate properly by introducing new reasons after the determination, relying on flawed assumptions, and disregarding relevant evidence, including comparable third-party contracts and agreed success rates. The CEO's approach to duration, revenue share, and interest was found to be unreasonable and resulted in a patently inequitable outcome for Makate. The court declined to substitute its own decision, finding that it was...

Citation
[2022] ZAGPPHC 55
Parties
Applicant: Kenneth Nkosana Makate; Respondent: Shameel Joosub N.O; Respondent: Vodacom (Pty) Limited
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 February 2022
Case Number
57882/2019
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment After Review of Ceo's Compensation Determination
Judges
Hughes
Legal Topics
Contractual Dispute Resolution, Expert Valuation Review, Remedies for Breach of Contract, Costs Award, Review of Private Decision, Compensation Calculation
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Contractual Dispute Resolution Expert Valuation Review Remedies for Breach of Contract Costs Award Review of Private Decision Compensation Calculation

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

Parties

Kenneth Nkosana Makate

Applicant

Shameel Joosub N.O

Respondent

Vodacom (Pty) Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment After Review of Ceo's Compensation Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the CEO's determination of compensation payable to Makate for the Please Call Me product is reviewable under South African law.
  2. 2 Whether the CEO acted within his mandate and exercised the judgment of a reasonable person in making the determination.
  3. 3 Whether the CEO's decision was unreasonable, irregular, or resulted in a patently inequitable outcome.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the CEO's determination of compensation for Makate was reviewable under the narrow standard applicable to expert valuers: whether the decision was made honestly, in good faith, and with the judgment of a reasonable person. The CEO failed to exercise his mandate properly by introducing new reasons after the determination, relying on flawed assumptions, and disregarding relevant evidence, including comparable third-party contracts and agreed success rates. The CEO's approach to duration, revenue share, and interest was found to be unreasonable and resulted in a patently inequitable outcome for Makate. The court declined to substitute its own decision, finding that it was...