Greater Tzaneen Municipality v Le Grange

Andre Jean Jacques Le Grange had been employed by the Greater Tzaneen Municipality for 17 years. In April 2010 he concluded a fixed-term contract appointing him as Chief Financial Officer (CFO) for three years, expiring on 30 June 2012. Clause 2.3.1 of the written agreement recorded that, if the contract was not renewed, the municipality would "endeavour" to accommodate him in a permanent position suited to his qualifications and experience. After expiry of the CFO term, Le Grange insisted that the municipality was obliged to keep him employed. The municipality denied this and urgently approached the High Court for an interdict preventing him from accessing municipal premises as an employee. Le Grange opposed the interdict, counter-applied for enforcement of clause 2.3.1, and sought rectification of the clause by replacing the word "endeavour" with "be obliged", alleging a common mistake arising from an erroneous translation of the Afrikaans word "onderneem". The High Court dismissed the interdict and granted rectification. The municipality appealed only against the rectification order.

The appeal was dismissed with costs. The rectification order granted by the High Court stood.

The case clarifies the boundary between Labour Court and High Court jurisdiction in employment-related disputes, reaffirming that contractual claims for specific performance fall within High Court jurisdiction. It also illustrates the requirements for rectification of contracts in South African law and confirms that municipalities may be held to contractual undertakings outside the strict framework of fixed-term senior management appointments.