KEY POINTS
- Judge M. Ntanga authorized Phasha to progress her appeal against the repayment order.
- NSA initially asked for R412,000 yet subsequently reduced their demand to R353,005.89.
- According to Phasha the arrangements of her post-study agreement supersede the obligations of the JICA agreement.
Senyatsi Bennita Phasha obtained judicial authorization to challenge a court judgment about the return of R350,000 that Nissan South Africa paid for her Japanese education.
Nissan filed their lawsuit against Phasha in September 2024 during which the South Gauteng High Court found against her because she did not fulfill the Japan-based training program requirements by leaving prematurely.
The court has authorized the appeal after Judge M. Ntanga recognized dissimilar verdicts could emerge during the evaluation.
Judge Ntanga determined that the appeal’s process should continue because important facts support it and justice demands it. “There are reasonable prospects that another court may come to a different conclusion.”
Study loan dispute and legal battle
His work at NSA as a fleet manager started in 2014 until he accepted the African Business Education Initiative for Youth scholarship under Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) in 2016. The signed agreement contained a requirement for NSA service during two years and six months after her return.
She began a new employment agreement at another firm within fifteen months of program completion. NSA submitted a repayment claim which originally exceeded R412,000 but NSA subsequently revised this amount to R353,005.89.
The Japanese government established this program for backups to guarantee that the company would keep the ideal personnel pool according to the HR manager at NSA. “Phasha was expected to remain at NSA for a specific period to plough back what she learned.”
Appeal arguments and court response
Phasha argued that Clause 14 of the JICA agreement indicated the agreement would become void after the program’s completion, and that a new employment.
The court considered NSA’s HR manager’s statements as hearsay evidence because he played no part in creating or signing the agreement.
In granting the appeal, Judge Ntanga said, “I am satisfied that the applicant has met the threshold for the leave to appeal to be granted… There are reasonable prospects that another court may come to a different conclusion as regards the study loan dispute.”
