He Fought Vodacom For 20 Yrs &Won—Now British Investor Is Trying To Take 40% Of Every Rand He Earned

Nkosana Makate, credited with inventing Vodacom’s popular “Please Call Me” service, is reportedly preparing to pursue a private prosecution against a Johannesburg businessman who allegedly demands a significant portion of Makate’s long-awaited settlement payout.

The conflict stems from the multi-million-rand compensation awarded to Makate after a prolonged legal battle over his role in creating the “Please Call Me” feature during his time at Vodacom. The service, which enables users to send a free SMS prompting someone to call them back, became a defining element of mobile communication in South Africa.

The businessman is said to be claiming 40% of the settlement, asserting a right to part of the proceeds. Makate, however, disputes this and has initiated steps toward private prosecution, marking an escalation in their legal disagreement.

Makate’s original case against Vodacom lasted over ten years and involved intricate questions about intellectual property, employee rights to invention compensation, and contractual duties. The Constitutional Court ultimately ruled in his favour, confirming that Vodacom had profited from his idea and was required to provide fair remuneration.

The resulting settlement is considered one of the most notable in South African IP history, attracting broad attention due to its financial scale and broader implications for employee innovation within corporate environments.

This latest dispute introduces a new dimension to the ongoing legal narrative, spotlighting issues around third-party claims on court-awarded settlements and the burden of proof required to substantiate such demands. Legal analysts emphasize that claiming a share of a settlement typically hinges on demonstrable legal or contractual grounds, which must withstand judicial scrutiny.

While uncommon, private prosecution permits individuals to bring criminal charges when state prosecutors choose not to act—though such cases face rigorous legal standards and court supervision.

As of now, the specifics of the businessman’s claim and the evidence behind it remain unverified by the public, and no court has ruled on any entitlement to Makate’s compensation.

The matter is expected to unfold through formal legal processes, with both sides anticipated to present their cases. Observers suggest the outcome could help define clearer legal parameters around settlement ownership, contractual assertions, and disputes arising after judgment in major civil cases.

For the time being, the situation remains unsettled, with Makate seeking to safeguard his award while the businessman continues to assert his claim.