Solidarity obo Scholtz M v Gijima Holdings (Pty) Ltd (JA131/2017) [2019] ZALAC 29; (2019) 40 ILJ 1216 (LAC); [2019] 8 BLLR 774 (LAC) (26 February 2019)

Solidarity obo Scholtz M v Gijima Holdings (Pty) Ltd (JA131/2017) [2019] ZALAC 29; (2019) 40 ILJ 1216 (LAC); [2019] 8 BLLR 774 (LAC) (26 February 2019)

The ELISA was a reciprocal contract requiring the employee to remain in employment for 12 months following payment of the retention bonus. Mr Scholtz urged the employer to pay the bonus after notice of termination and accepted the payment, thereby binding himself to the contract's terms. The purported cancellation of the ELISA was not effective as it was not reduced to writing and signed by both parties as required by Clause 8.2. Mr Scholtz did not accept the repudiation but instead insisted on performance. The deduction of the retention bonus from his terminal remuneration was justified under Clause 7.1, and did not offend section 34 of the BCEA, as it was made by agreement and did not...

Citation
[2019] ZALAC 29
Parties
Appellant: Solidarity obo Scholtz M; Respondent: Gijima Holdings (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Appeal Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 February 2019
Case Number
JA131/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; Labour Court judgment upheld.
Judges
Phatshoane, Sutherland, Kathree-Setiloane
Legal Topics
Unlawful Deduction, Retention Bonus, Reciprocal Contracts, Breach of Contract, Specific Performance, Basic Conditions of Employment Act
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unlawful Deduction Retention Bonus Reciprocal Contracts Breach of Contract Specific Performance Basic Conditions of Employment Act

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Solidarity obo Scholtz M

Appellant

Gijima Holdings (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the employer was entitled to deduct the retention bonus from the employee's terminal remuneration following resignation before expiry of the retention period.
  2. 2 Whether the deduction offended against section 34 of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act (BCEA).
  3. 3 Whether the Employee Loyalty Incentive Scheme Agreement (ELISA) was validly terminated and binding on the employee.

Ratio Decidendi

The ELISA was a reciprocal contract requiring the employee to remain in employment for 12 months following payment of the retention bonus. Mr Scholtz urged the employer to pay the bonus after notice of termination and accepted the payment, thereby binding himself to the contract's terms. The purported cancellation of the ELISA was not effective as it was not reduced to writing and signed by both parties as required by Clause 8.2. Mr Scholtz did not accept the repudiation but instead insisted on performance. The deduction of the retention bonus from his terminal remuneration was justified under Clause 7.1, and did not offend section 34 of the BCEA, as it was made by agreement and did not...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; Labour Court judgment upheld.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.