Sello v Phakisa Corporate Services (Pty) Ltd (J1242/19) [2021] ZALCJHB 184 (2 August 2021)

Sello v Phakisa Corporate Services (Pty) Ltd (J1242/19) [2021] ZALCJHB 184 (2 August 2021)

The court found that the applicant complied with her obligations under the settlement agreement by providing her Lesotho Special Permit, which entitled her to work in South Africa. The respondent failed to offer any explanation for its continued refusal to comply with the agreement after receiving the permit on 10 April 2019. Accordingly, the respondent was obliged to re-employ the applicant and pay her lost salaries from 10 April 2019, together with interest. The settlement agreement was made an order of court, and the respondent was ordered to pay costs.

Citation
[2021] ZALCJHB 184
Parties
Applicant: Mary Mangaka Sello; Respondent: Phakisa Corporate Services (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 August 2021
Case Number
J1242/19
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application to Make Settlement Agreement an Order of Court Under Section 158(1)(c) of the Labour Relations Act
Outcome
Application granted; settlement agreement made an order of court; respondent ordered to re-employ applicant and pay lost salaries and costs.
Judges
L. Raphulu
Legal Topics
Settlement Agreement Enforcement, Reinstatement, Lost Salary, Work Permit Compliance
Labour Law Civil Procedure Settlement Agreement Enforcement Reinstatement Lost Salary Work Permit 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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mary Mangaka Sello

Applicant

Phakisa Corporate Services (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application to Make Settlement Agreement an Order of Court Under Section 158(1)(c) of the Labour Relations Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the settlement agreement concluded at the CCMA should be made an order of court.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant complied with her obligations under the settlement agreement.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent was justified in refusing to re-employ the applicant based on alleged lack of valid work permit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant complied with her obligations under the settlement agreement by providing her Lesotho Special Permit, which entitled her to work in South Africa. The respondent failed to offer any explanation for its continued refusal to comply with the agreement after receiving the permit on 10 April 2019. Accordingly, the respondent was obliged to re-employ the applicant and pay her lost salaries from 10 April 2019, together with interest. The settlement agreement was made an order of court, and the respondent was ordered to pay costs.

Court Disposition

Application granted; settlement agreement made an order of court; respondent ordered to re-employ applicant and pay lost salaries and costs.

Orders

  • The settlement agreement concluded at the CCMA on 6 March 2018 under case number GATW1855-18 is made an order of court.
  • The respondent is to re-employ the applicant to the position as at the time of her dismissal, or if that position no longer exists, a similar or equivalent position.