Appeal grounds
The main crux of deVere’s appeal centres on the right Pennell had to work in South Africa and the lack of weight attributed to this by the judge.
A British national, Pennell worked for deVere under a spousal visa which expired on 12 June 2014. He was fired on 8 September that year on the basis that he did not have a work permit.
The company argued that Pennell’s contract was effectively nullified as he no longer had the right to work in the country.
However, the defence cited legal statue that the lack of a work permit does not invalidate an employment contract and the judge dismissed this defence in court.
DeVere’s defence team also argue that, as a licensed and regulated financial consultancy company, deVere is bound to comply with South Africa’s Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act (FAIS).
Under these rules, “authorised financial services providers must at all times be satisfied that the provider’s representatives, and the key individuals of such representatives, are, when rendering a financial service on behalf of the provider, competent to act, and comply with the fit and proper requirements” of the Act.
The appeals document argues that a representative without a valid work permit does not meet the fit and proper requirements.
Money
The appeal also states that the court erred in ordering deVere to pay the outstanding retention bonus amount of £130,000 because it did not appropriately consider the “relevant admissible evidence concerning the genesis, purpose and surrounding circumstances that existed at the time and that gave rise to the alleged agreement to pay [Pennell] a retention bonus”.
It also argues that the calculation of the £217,380 payment into South African rand should be made at the time the “amounts allegedly became due, owing and payable” not at current exchange rates.
The documents concludes: “It is respectfully submitted that there are reasonable prospects that another court would come to a different conclusion to that of this court.”
