![[WATCH] 'Please call me' inventor's case heads back to supreme court](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia-cache.primedia-service.com%2Fmedia%2F0xkdv1vn%2Fnkosana-makate.jpg%3Fwidth%3D1200%26height%3D630&w=3840&q=100)
[WATCH] 'Please call me' inventor's case heads back to supreme court
Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga handed down a scathing judgment against the supreme court ruling that it made several errors in its ruling that ultimately favoured Makate.
The Constitutional Court has referred the matter back to the supreme court, but ordered that it be heard before a different panel.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
a day ago
- IOL News
Apex Court's surprise ruling extends Makate's Please Call Me Battle
Nqolokazi Nomvalo ss Head of Legal: Operations at Life Healthcare Group. Image: Supplied FOR nearly two decades, South Africans have watched the legal saga between Vodacom and its former employee, Nkosana Makate, unfold like a courtroom drama with no final act. The latest twist, a unanimous Constitutional Court judgment handed down on Thursday, has reignited public interest and legal debate. In a development that stunned many legal observers and defied predictions of finality, the apex court has remitted the case back to the Supreme Court of Appeal. It will now be reconsidered by a freshly constituted bench. This move injects fresh uncertainty into a saga long believed to be approaching its conclusion. But what does this mean, and why does it matter? It is important to clarify that Makate's original idea was a simple yet powerful proposition: a mobile user with no airtime should be able to 'buzz' another user, prompting them to call back. Vodacom, recognising the creativity, developed the concept into the now-famous "Please Call Me" free message. This version allowed for costless transmission and universal utility. That difference matters, especially when assessing the various compensation models, which have ranged from employee-equivalent remuneration to revenue-sharing frameworks. The Supreme Court of Appeal had previously affirmed the Gauteng High Court's decision in Makate's favour and went further, controversially substituting its own compensation formula and awarding Makate 5 to 7.5 percent of Please Call Me revenue. Vodacom challenged this ruling, arguing that the SCA overstepped its bounds as an appellate court, particularly because Makate had not lodged a cross-appeal. The Constitutional Court, being the highest court in the land, granted Vodacom leave to appeal and upheld its challenge. Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga, writing for a unanimous bench in what is widely regarded as his swan judgment before retirement, agreed. The Constitutional Court held that the SCA had impermissibly ventured into terrain that required a cross-appeal and had disregarded the true issues before it. This resulted in a failure of justice, specifically a breach of Vodacom's right to a fair public hearing as guaranteed under section 34 of the Constitution. The Constitutional Court has directed that the case return to the SCA, where a different panel of judges will now consider it afresh. It marks a rare judicial reset in a case that has already passed through every major court in the country. The legal significance of this moment cannot be overstated. The Constitutional Court has reinforced the boundaries of appellate authority and revived critical scrutiny around the quantum of fair compensation. The referral order compels the SCA to take a fresh look, with a new bench and a sharper lens, at the determination originally made by Vodacom's CEO. That figure was R47 million, reached after extensive modelling and expert input. It followed a failed negotiation between Makate, who proposed R20.2 billion, and Vodacom, which offered R10 million. Makate has challenged the CEO's determination as woefully low, especially in light of the widespread success of the Please Call Me service. Beyond the courtroom, this case has come to represent the struggle for equitable recognition of intellectual contributions, especially by employees in corporate ecosystems. The 'Please Call Me' litigation has gripped the public imagination. It's not just because of the staggering figures involved. It speaks to something profoundly South African: the courage to claim one's voice and the power of innovation born in unlikely places. As the legal process restarts again, one hopes that the eventual outcome will honour not just the merits of law but the deeper values it serves—justice, fairness, and transformative equity. That would be a fitting tribute to Justice Madlanga's legacy of principled clarity and constitutional fidelity. (Nomvalo is Head of Legal: Operations at Life Healthcare Group. She began her career in corporate litigation and commercial law at Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr Inc. Her expertise also encompasses traditional arts, heritage preservation, transformation, and the promotion of women's and children's rights. Her views don't necessarily reflect those of the Sunday Tribune or Independent Media) SUNDAY TRIBUNE
Eyewitness News
2 days ago
- Eyewitness News
Makate believes ConCourt could've had more conclusive findings in battle with Vodacom
JOHANNESBURG - 'Please call me' inventor, Nkosana Makate, said he believes that the Constitutional Court could have come to a conclusive finding in his battle with telecommunications giant Vodacom. The apex court has remitted the matter back to the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA), setting aside its ruling. ALSO READ: Despite ConCourt setback, 'Please call me' inventor Makate still resilient in battle with Vodacom In a scathing judgment, the Constitutional Court pointed out that the appeals court made several errors in its adjudication of the matter, which resulted in a ruling in Makate's favour. Makate and Vodacom have been in an almost 20-year battle over what is due to Makate over the invention of the 'Please call me' product. In his final judgment before retirement, Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga highlighted what he called the SCA's fatal shortcomings in that it did not make its own decision on the issues in the matter. The court has granted Vodacom leave to appeal the SCA's judgment but has also ruled that the matter should go back to the court before a different panel. "It seems to me the just and equitable remedy [77] is for the appeal to be decided on its merits by the court that ought to have decided it. More importantly, in the main, what remains for determination in the appeal are factual questions that do not ordinarily fall for determination by this court." But Makate said he was expecting a different decision. "I think the ConCourt could have finalised the matter. We still had a hearing in the high court, which they could have gone to as well, and ignored the SCA completely. They could have done that." Makate said he remains resilient and sure in his case.
The Citizen
2 days ago
- The Citizen
Crime that funds classrooms
A landmark court ruling forces a cigarette seller to fund desks for local schools, benefiting pupils and justice alike. The sellers of illegal cigarettes are, according to the SA Revenue Service, posing a significant threat to the fiscus because of their avoidance of duties and value added tax. That's why a conviction of such a seller – and accompanying hefty fine – is something to be welcomed. But, the Evander Regional Court went a step further this week in imposing a further punishment which will have a direct social benefit. Uptown Superstore was fined R600 000 – but must also buy 504 durable, quality double-seater desks for four schools in the area. ALSO READ: Company found guilty of illicit cigarette trade, fined R600k and ordered to buy desks for schools The company has three months to comply with the court judgment. Major-General Nico Gerber, provincial head of the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation, was a master of understatement in calling it 'an interesting sentence…' But was spot-on when he added: 'The community is benefiting from this sentence and it will definitely assist the next generation in their needs for a better education.' We suggest that other courts take judicial notice of that sentence and consider imposing similar punishments. A crime which affects the community – and smuggling does that by taking tax revenue away from where it could be spent improving lives – should have some sort of payback which helps the community. NOW READ: Vodacom scores ConCourt win over Please Call Me inventor Nkosana Makate
