The originator of the Please Call Me service has affirmed his intention to remain in his position at the South African Local Government Association, where he serves as a financial controller. Nkosana Kenneth Makate shared this resolve in discussions following the resolution of his protracted dispute with Vodacom over remuneration for his innovation, which concluded ahead of a planned rehearing on 18 November 2025. As reported by Sunday Times, the agreement, whose precise value remains confidential, is projected to fall between R353 million and R748 million, based on its anticipated effect on Vodacom’s forthcoming interim earnings disclosure.
Makate has dismissed notions of an extended break or resignation, emphasising his dedication to his role until he chooses otherwise. This stance follows his earlier sentiments that no monetary sum could equate to the alleviation of litigation-induced stress and the restoration of everyday normalcy. He also addressed conjectures regarding Vodacom potentially unveiling the settlement figure during its financial presentation, noting that both parties are constrained by confidentiality obligations. Although no sanctions apply for breaches, Makate intends to honour the accord and anticipates reciprocal adherence from Vodacom.
The resolution concludes nearly eighteen years of judicial confrontations between Makate and the telecommunications firm concerning compensation for a concept he proposed to his superior at Vodacom in November 2000. While employed as a trainee accountant, Makate suggested a mechanism to alert another user’s device without prepaid credit, terming it the buzzing feature in a memorandum dated 21 November 2000 directed to his then-supervisor. Internal communications presented in legal proceedings revealed assurances of discussion with the former chief executive regarding appropriate recompense, though cautions were issued that routine contributions might not warrant extra incentives.
Makate was uninvolved in the product’s development or rollout, with evidence suggesting a rival operator pioneered a comparable service nearly three months earlier. He contended a verbal agreement for reward existed, supported by correspondence pledging advocacy for recognition should the initiative succeed. Initial court defeats in the High Court and Supreme Court of Appeal were overturned by the Constitutional Court on 26 April 2016, which deemed the opposing testimony unreliable and favoured Makate’s account.
The apex court mandated good-faith negotiations for equitable payment, designating Vodacom’s current leader as an impasse resolver. The proffered R47 million was declined as inadequate, leading to further litigation where Makate sought up to R126 billion, securing advantageous decisions in subsequent courts. The Supreme Court directed compensation equivalent to five to seven point five per cent of the service’s revenues over its duration, incorporating interest.
Vodacom contested this at the Constitutional Court, arguing procedural unfairness and unenforceability, estimating a range of R29 billion to R63 billion. The court concurred, lambasting the prior judgment for evidentiary oversights and mandating a rehearing with fresh adjudicators. According to Sunday Times, Makate’s persistence stemmed from a quest for justice, with the settlement averting further courtroom engagements.
This accord not only resolves a landmark intellectual property dispute but also underscores evolving dynamics in employee innovation rights within corporate settings. As detailed by Business Day, Vodacom’s updated financial guidance reflects the settlement’s material influence, adjusting expected earnings downward by three to five per cent. Makate’s decision to maintain employment amid newfound wealth highlights a grounded approach, potentially inspiring discussions on work-life balance post-financial windfalls. The case’s legacy endures in South African jurisprudence, influencing future compensation claims for internal ideas.