Saohatse v Vista University (J1496/98) [1999] ZALC 88 (3 June 1999)

Saohatse v Vista University (J1496/98) [1999] ZALC 88 (3 June 1999)

The court found that the applicant's claim for a three-notch salary increase was not supported by the terms of the settlement agreement or the respondent's policy. The evidence showed that the applicant received the promotion and salary increases to which she was entitled under the policy, and any further increase would place her outside the salary scale for her position. The court held that exceptional circumstances for additional notches are intended as a reward for excellence, not for litigation. The relief sought by the applicant went beyond the express terms of the settlement agreement, and she had not sought rectification. The court also found that an interdict is not the...

Citation
[1999] ZALC 88
Parties
Applicant: Dr M.C. Saohatse; Respondent: Vista University
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 June 1999
Case Number
J1496/98
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Enforcement of Settlement Agreement and Salary Adjustment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs on a party and party scale.
Judges
G J Marcus
Legal Topics
Promotion Policy, Salary Notch Increase, Settlement Agreement Enforcement, Remedies for Non Compliance
Labour Law Promotion Policy Salary Notch Increase Settlement Agreement Enforcement Remedies for Non Compliance

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr M.C. Saohatse

Applicant

Vista University

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Enforcement of Settlement Agreement and Salary Adjustment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent complied with the court order and settlement agreement regarding the applicant's promotion and salary adjustment.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to a three-notch salary increase upon promotion under the respondent's policy.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's claim for further salary increases is supported by the terms of the settlement agreement or the respondent's policy.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's claim for a three-notch salary increase was not supported by the terms of the settlement agreement or the respondent's policy. The evidence showed that the applicant received the promotion and salary increases to which she was entitled under the policy, and any further increase would place her outside the salary scale for her position. The court held that exceptional circumstances for additional notches are intended as a reward for excellence, not for litigation. The relief sought by the applicant went beyond the express terms of the settlement agreement, and she had not sought rectification. The court also found that an interdict is not the...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs on a party and party scale.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the respondent's costs on a party and party scale.