IRM1501
Assignment 2 Semester 1 2025
Unique #:
Due Date: 2025
Detailed solutions, explanations, workings
and references.
+27 81 278 3372
, QUESTION 1 (3 ANSWERS PROVIDED)
Makate v Vodacom (Pty) Ltd (CCT52/15) [2016] ZACC 13 (26 April 2016)
Facts of the case
The case of Makate relates to a contractual dispute between Vodacom and Mr
Makate which stems from an oral agreement that was concluded between Mr
Makate and Mr Geissler, the Director of Product Development and Management
at Vodacom.1 This oral agreement was later induced in writing by Mr Geissler
who was at the time acting on behalf of Vodacom and this was done via email
correspondence.2 Mr Makate at the time of the conclusion of the agreement was
an employee of Vodacom and he was employed as a trainee accountant. 3 He had
a distance relationship with his girlfriend and they were struggling to communicate
because ‘she did not always have money to call Mr Makate’.
This encouraged Mr Makate to invent a please ‘call me product’, which would
enable him to effectively communicate with each other and he discussed this idea
with his mentor who later referred him to Mr Geissler.4
Before the launch of the please call me product, Mr Makate discussed the
feasibility of the product with Mr Geissler, and part of this discussion included an
agreement that he, Mr Makate would be paid a share when the product is
launched, he asked for 15%. Subsequently, they both agreed that should there be
a dispute regarding the compensation, the amount to be paid to Mr Makate would
be determined by the CEO.5
Subsequently, there was written communication to all staff members via the
newsletter which confirmed and acknowledged the main inventor of the product
as Mr Makate. In this communication the staff were informed about the manner in
which this product would be launched. However, there was another
correspondence that was sent to the staff wherein it was alleged that the product
1
Makate v Vodacom (Pty) Ltd (CCT52/15) [2016] ZACC 13 [ 1-16] (Hereinafter referred to as
The Makate case).
2
The Makate case [12].
3
The Makate case [2].
4
The Makate case [ 2 – 4].
5
The Makate case [5].
Varsity Cube 2024 +27 81 278 3372
Assignment 2 Semester 1 2025
Unique #:
Due Date: 2025
Detailed solutions, explanations, workings
and references.
+27 81 278 3372
, QUESTION 1 (3 ANSWERS PROVIDED)
Makate v Vodacom (Pty) Ltd (CCT52/15) [2016] ZACC 13 (26 April 2016)
Facts of the case
The case of Makate relates to a contractual dispute between Vodacom and Mr
Makate which stems from an oral agreement that was concluded between Mr
Makate and Mr Geissler, the Director of Product Development and Management
at Vodacom.1 This oral agreement was later induced in writing by Mr Geissler
who was at the time acting on behalf of Vodacom and this was done via email
correspondence.2 Mr Makate at the time of the conclusion of the agreement was
an employee of Vodacom and he was employed as a trainee accountant. 3 He had
a distance relationship with his girlfriend and they were struggling to communicate
because ‘she did not always have money to call Mr Makate’.
This encouraged Mr Makate to invent a please ‘call me product’, which would
enable him to effectively communicate with each other and he discussed this idea
with his mentor who later referred him to Mr Geissler.4
Before the launch of the please call me product, Mr Makate discussed the
feasibility of the product with Mr Geissler, and part of this discussion included an
agreement that he, Mr Makate would be paid a share when the product is
launched, he asked for 15%. Subsequently, they both agreed that should there be
a dispute regarding the compensation, the amount to be paid to Mr Makate would
be determined by the CEO.5
Subsequently, there was written communication to all staff members via the
newsletter which confirmed and acknowledged the main inventor of the product
as Mr Makate. In this communication the staff were informed about the manner in
which this product would be launched. However, there was another
correspondence that was sent to the staff wherein it was alleged that the product
1
Makate v Vodacom (Pty) Ltd (CCT52/15) [2016] ZACC 13 [ 1-16] (Hereinafter referred to as
The Makate case).
2
The Makate case [12].
3
The Makate case [2].
4
The Makate case [ 2 – 4].
5
The Makate case [5].
Varsity Cube 2024 +27 81 278 3372
