Gbenga-Oluwatoye v Reckitt Benckiser South Africa (Pty) Limited and Another

The applicant, Mr Muyiwa Gbenga-Oluwatoye, was employed by Reckitt Benckiser South Africa (Pty) Ltd as a regional human resources director from July 2013. In February 2014, Reckitt investigated allegations that he had misrepresented his qualifications and employment history during recruitment, specifically falsely stating that he was employed by Unilever when he was in fact employed by Standard Chartered Bank. Reckitt regarded this misrepresentation as material, particularly because it led to the payment of a US$40 000 sign-on bonus. The applicant was suspended and dismissed on 3 March 2014. Thereafter, the parties concluded a mutual separation (settlement) agreement providing for full and final settlement of all disputes and including a clause in which the applicant waived his right to approach the CCMA, the Labour Court, or any other court. The applicant later challenged the dismissal and the validity of the settlement agreement, alleging lack of a pre-dismissal hearing and contending that the waiver clause was unlawful and contrary to public policy.

Condonation for the late filing of the application for leave to appeal was granted, but the application for leave to appeal was refused with costs.

The case affirms that settlement agreements in employment disputes, including clauses waiving access to courts or labour forums, can be constitutionally valid where concluded voluntarily between parties with approximately equal bargaining power. It underscores the strong public-policy interest in enforcing full and final settlements and clarifies that section 34 of the Constitution does not prohibit all contractual waivers of judicial redress, particularly in the context of resolving existing disputes.