Strydom v University of South Africa (A 173/2011) [2014] ZAGPPHC 1010 (12 December 2014)

Strydom v University of South Africa (A 173/2011) [2014] ZAGPPHC 1010 (12 December 2014)

The court found that no agreement entitling the appellant to the post retirement medical aid benefit came into existence, as the appellant failed to comply with the conditions precedent set out in the respondent's circular. The benefit was only available to employees who retired and followed the prescribed mechanism, which included applying while still employed, waiving future claims, and indemnifying the respondent. The appellant took a voluntary severance package and only sought the benefit after ceasing employment, contrary to the required procedure. Furthermore, the Labour Court order barred the respondent from offering the benefit to union members, making performance impossible. The...

Citation
[2014] ZAGPPHC 1010
Parties
Appellant: Dr JG Strydom; Respondent: University of South Africa
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 December 2014
Case Number
A 173/2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Dismissal of Application for Payment of Post Retirement Medical Aid Benefit
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
M W Msimeki, P M Mabuse, L Windell
Legal Topics
Contractual Entitlement, Conditions Precedent, Post Retirement Medical Aid, Estoppel, Union Mandate, Impossibility of Performance
Civil Procedure Labour Law Contractual Entitlement Conditions Precedent Post Retirement Medical Aid Estoppel Union Mandate Impossibility of Performance

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 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr JG Strydom

Appellant

University of South Africa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Dismissal of Application for Payment of Post Retirement Medical Aid Benefit

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an agreement was concluded entitling the appellant to payment of the post retirement medical aid benefit.
  2. 2 Whether any such agreement was subject to conditions precedent and whether those were fulfilled.
  3. 3 Whether the Labour Court order rendered performance impossible.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that no agreement entitling the appellant to the post retirement medical aid benefit came into existence, as the appellant failed to comply with the conditions precedent set out in the respondent's circular. The benefit was only available to employees who retired and followed the prescribed mechanism, which included applying while still employed, waiving future claims, and indemnifying the respondent. The appellant took a voluntary severance package and only sought the benefit after ceasing employment, contrary to the required procedure. Furthermore, the Labour Court order barred the respondent from offering the benefit to union members, making performance impossible. The...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.