Mhlontlo Local Municipality and Others v Ngcangula and Another (1154/2022) [2024] ZASCA 5; [2024] 3 BLLR 239 (SCA); (2024) 45 ILJ 775 (SCA) (17 January 2024)

Mhlontlo Local Municipality and Others v Ngcangula and Another (1154/2022) [2024] ZASCA 5; [2024] 3 BLLR 239 (SCA); (2024) 45 ILJ 775 (SCA) (17 January 2024)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the High Court correctly determined it had jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute based on the respondents’ pleadings, which implicated a breach of contract of employment. However, the respondents failed to establish a contractual entitlement to the 2.5% notch increment, as neither their contracts nor the evidence supported such entitlement. The increment was only payable to qualifying employees, and the respondents did not meet the criteria. Payment made in error cannot give rise to a contractual right. The subsequent payment by the municipality did not amount to peremption, as there was no unequivocal conduct indicating abandonment of the appeal....

Citation
[2024] ZASCA 5
Parties
Appellant: Mhlontlo Local Municipality; Appellant: The Speaker: Mhlontlo Local Municipality; Appellant: The Municipal Manager: Mhlontlo Local Municipality; Respondent: Gcinikhaya Ngcangula; Respondent: Malibongwe Nqeketho
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 January 2024
Case Number
1154/2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Eastern Cape Local Division of the High Court, Mthatha
Outcome
Appeal upheld; High Court order set aside and applications dismissed with costs (excluding costs for preparation of the appeal record).
Judges
Nicholls, Carelse, Matojane, Chetty, Tokota
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Civil Courts, Breach of Employment Contract, Salary Deductions, Basic Conditions of Employment Act, Peremption, Mootness
Labour Law Civil Procedure Jurisdiction of Civil Courts Breach of Employment Contract Salary Deductions Basic Conditions of Employment Act Peremption Mootness

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 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mhlontlo Local Municipality

Appellant

The Speaker: Mhlontlo Local Municipality

Appellant

The Municipal Manager: Mhlontlo Local Municipality

Appellant

Gcinikhaya Ngcangula

Respondent

Malibongwe Nqeketho

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Eastern Cape Local Division of the High Court, Mthatha

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the withdrawal of the salary increment constitutes a breach of contract of employment.
  2. 2 Whether the High Court had jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute under section 77(3) of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act.
  3. 3 Whether subsequent payment to the respondents after obtaining leave to appeal results in the appeal being perempted.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the High Court correctly determined it had jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute based on the respondents’ pleadings, which implicated a breach of contract of employment. However, the respondents failed to establish a contractual entitlement to the 2.5% notch increment, as neither their contracts nor the evidence supported such entitlement. The increment was only payable to qualifying employees, and the respondents did not meet the criteria. Payment made in error cannot give rise to a contractual right. The subsequent payment by the municipality did not amount to peremption, as there was no unequivocal conduct indicating abandonment of the appeal....

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; High Court order set aside and applications dismissed with costs (excluding costs for preparation of the appeal record).

Orders

  • The appeal is reinstated with no order as to costs.
  • The appeal is upheld with costs, save that no costs are to be paid by the respondents for the preparation of the appeal record.