IRM1501 ASSIGNMENT 2 SEMESTER 1 - 2024
DUE DATE: 19 APRIL 2024
QUESTION
Find the case of Makate v Vodacom (Pty) Ltd (CCT52/15) [2016] ZACC 13; 2016 (6) BCLR 709 (CC); 2016 (4) SA 121 (CC) (26 April 2016) and discuss this case in the prescribed format (Facts, legal question, reasons for the ...
IRM1501
ASSIGNMENT 2
SEMESTER 1
DUE DATE: 19 APRIL
2024
"Elevate Your Excellence: Where Distinction Meets Assurance in Every Assignment!"
,IRM1501 ASSIGNMENT 2 SEMESTER 1 – 2024
DUE DATE: 19 APRIL 2024
1
, ASSIGNMENT TWO
QUESTION 1
Find the case of Makate v Vodacom (Pty) Ltd (CCT52/15) [2016] ZACC 13; 2016 (6) BCLR 709
(CC); 2016 (4) SA 121 (CC) (26 April 2016) and discuss this case in the prescribed format (Facts,
legal question, reasons for the decision or ratio decidendi and the findings).
(20 MARKS)
The Right to a Fair Hearing and Ostensible Authority: Examining Makate v Vodacom (Pty) Ltd
INTRODUCTION:
The South African legal system prioritizes a fair and just resolution of disputes. This principle is
enshrined in the Constitution's right to a fair hearing (Section 34). The case of Makate v
Vodacom (Pty) Ltd (CCT52/15) [2016] ZACC 13 (26 April 2016) exemplifies this commitment.
This case centered on a contract dispute and the concept of ostensible authority, where
someone appears to have the power to bind a company to an agreement. By examining the
facts, legal question, reasoning of the court (ratio decidendi), and the final findings, we can
delve into the intricacies of this case and its contribution to legal principles in South Africa.
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’. 4
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].
2
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through EFT, credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying this summary from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller Masters. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy this summary for R50,00. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
