South Africa’s long-running legal saga over Vodacom’s “Please Call Me” (PCM) innovation reached yet another turning point on Thursday. In a unanimous decision, the Constitutional Court overturned the February 2024 Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) ruling in favour of Nkosana Makate and sent the case back for a fresh hearing before a different panel of SCA judges.

Delivering his final judgment before retirement, outgoing Constitutional Court Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga found that the SCA had committed procedural errors in handling the appeal brought by Vodacom.

The apex court ruled that the SCA exceeded its jurisdiction by substituting Vodacom’s initial R47 million compensation offer without a cross-appeal. More critically, the Constitutional Court found the SCA violated Makate’s constitutional right to a fair hearing—an error that, according to Madlanga, amounted to “a failure of justice.”

“The nearly two-decade dispute amounts to unending litigation,” said Justice Madlanga. He added that such complexity and legal contention underscore the importance of following due process.

Makate Responds Outside Court

Speaking to journalists outside the court, Nkosana Makate said he remained hopeful and determined.

“I am still resilient and I’ll forever be. We will go to the SCA, they must relocate the case and then provide us with a judgment that will stand the test,” he said.

Makate also stated that the ConCourt had not ruled on the SCA’s monetary findings, but rather focused on procedural fairness.

Moral and Legal Victory, Says Makate’s Legal Team

Makate’s legal counsel and spokesperson, Makate Maya, welcomed the judgment, calling it both a moral and constitutional victory.

“This ruling acknowledges serious due process violations. Mr Makate invented Please Call Me in November 2000 and helped generate billions in revenue for Vodacom. He deserves fair and transparent compensation,” said Maya.

She reiterated Makate’s long-standing position: he has rejected Vodacom’s previous offers—initially R47 million, later adjusted to R80 million with interest.

Makate is demanding either R9.4 billion or a 5%–7.5% share of PCM’s revenue from 2001 to present, plus interest and legal costs.

“This isn’t just about money,” said Maya. “It’s about recognising employee contributions to corporate innovation and affirming the rights of inventors, especially in a transforming South Africa.”

Vodacom Maintains Position

In response to the ruling, Vodacom issued a brief statement, welcoming the opportunity for a rehearing.

The company reiterated its position that Makate’s demands are excessive, speculative, and potentially damaging to its business model. It stood by its original offer and expressed concern about broader economic implications.

“Vodacom continues to believe the initial offer—adjusted to R80 million with interest—is fair and made in good faith,” the statement read.

The telecoms giant added that a significantly larger payout could negatively affect its BEE partners, public shareholders, and future foreign investment prospects.

How the Case Got Here

In February 2024, the SCA ruled that Vodacom must pay Makate between 5% and 7.5% of all PCM-related voice revenue from March 2001 to March 2021. That translated to a potential payout of R29 billion to R63 billion—far exceeding Makate’s own demand of R9.4 billion.

The SCA decision overturned both the earlier High Court ruling and Vodacom CEO Shameel Joosub’s compensation determination, which had previously pegged the payout at R47 million.

Vodacom challenged the ruling at the ConCourt, arguing the SCA had no jurisdiction to alter the compensation framework without a cross-appeal and that it had acted unfairly by ruling without full input from all parties.

What Makate Wants

Makate has remained resolute throughout the 18-year legal battle. He insists that any offer must reflect the true commercial value of the PCM idea, which allowed users without airtime to prompt others to call them back—a service Vodacom profited from for over two decades.

• His legal team argues that:
  Vodacom profited billions from PCM since its inception;
• The 2016 Constitutional Court ruling entitles him to reasonable compensation based on revenue;
• Settling for a lump sum without revenue linkage would undermine intellectual property justice and harm innovation culture in South Africa.

Experts say the case raises critical questions about how corporations treat employee-generated intellectual property, especially from junior staff. It also tests South Africa’s transformation commitments in recognising contributions from historically marginalised professionals.

What Happens Next

The matter now returns to the SCA, where a new panel of judges must rehear the compensation case. No timeline has been confirmed for when that hearing will take place.

While the ConCourt ruling resets the legal process, it does not guarantee finality. The outcome at the SCA may be contested again, depending on which side feels aggrieved.

For now, Makate’s claim remains unresolved—neither the quantum nor the principle of fair compensation has been conclusively determined.

As the case heads back to Bloemfontein, both sides are expected to dig in for yet another round in South Africa’s longest-running intellectual property and labour-related legal battle.