About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: Johannesburg Labour Court, Johannesburg
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: Johannesburg Labour Court, Johannesburg
>>
2014
>>
[2014] ZALCJHB 59
|
|
Smart v Bytes Managed Solutions, A Division of Bytes Technology Group of South Africa (Pty) Ltd (JS986/10) [2014] ZALCJHB 59 (10 March 2014)
REPUBLIC
OF SOUTH AFRICA
THE
LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA,
IN
JOHANNESBURG
JUDGMENT
Case
no: JS 986/10
Of
interest to other judges
In
the matter between:
GRETA
JOANNE
SMART Applicant
and
BYTES
MANAGED
SOLUTIONS, Respondent
a
Division of BYTES TECHNOLOGY
GROUP
OF SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD
RULING
ON REQUEST TO DETERMINE INTEREST ON QUANTUM
LAGRANGE,
J
[1]
It was brought to my attention that the
parties have an unresolved issue between them as to the payment of
interest due on the quantum
of the applicant’s standby duty and
overtime allowance, which the respondent was ordered to pay in terms
of the judgement.
Unfortunately the file was archived in error and
has only recently been placed before me again.
[2]
In my judgment, part of the order read:
“
[45]
The respondent is ordered to pay the applicant the difference between
the actual payment made to her for being on standby duty
and for
overtime worked and what she would have received had the formulas in
44.1 and 44.2 being applied, for the period commencing
8 December
2007 and ending 31 July 2010.
[46] The parties are
directed to seek consensus on the amount due to the applicant in
terms of paragraph [45] above within 15 days
of the date of this
order, and any amount so agreed upon in writing must be paid to the
applicant within 15 days thereafter, unless
the parties agree in
writing to extend the payment period to another specified date.
[47] In the event the
parties are unable to agree on the amount due to the applicant in
terms of paragraph [45] above, either party
may refer the
determination of the amount to this Court, subject to such directions
the Court might make as to the procedure to
be adopted.”
[3]
I understand that there is no dispute over
the amount to be determined by the parties in terms of paragraph [46]
of the judgement,
but only over any interest due on that amount. In
terms of paragraph [47] of the judgement, limited scope for the
Court's further
deliberation in the matter was provided for only in
the event that the parties could not agree on the amount due in terms
of paragraph
[45] of the judgement.
[4]
The judgement did not specify the date from
which interest on the unpaid portion of the applicant's standby
allowance and overtime
should be calculated. Although it is
regrettable that the parties are unable to agree on this between
themselves, it is not a matter
which falls within the scope of the
sole issue which was reserved for subsequent determination by the
court under paragraph [47].
In respect of any other issues beside
that one, the Court is
functus officio
.
[5]
Accordingly, I am unable to pronounce on
the question of the date from which interest due on the unpaid
portion of overtime pay
and standby allowance should run.
______________________
R
LAGRANGE, J
Judge
of the Labour Court
Date
issued: 10 March 2014