Published: 4 hours ago

Former Premier Services Medical Investment (PSMI) executive director for corporate services, Shingayi Mabuto, has approached the High Court seeking enforcement of a settlement agreement worth more than US$1.1 million, alleging that his former employer has failed to honour obligations arising from the termination of his employment.

Mabuto is seeking the registration of a deed of settlement concluded on April 24, 2025, under which PSMI reportedly agreed to settle salary arrears, contractual benefits and other obligations following a labour dispute between the parties.

According to court papers, the dispute arose after the termination of Mabuto's employment and centred on claims relating to unpaid salaries, contractual entitlements and terminal benefits.

The matter was referred to arbitration, with negotiations culminating in a deed of settlement that resolved a substantial portion of the claims.

Under the agreement, PSMI allegedly undertook to pay Mabuto US$1,100,439 in salary arrears and contractual benefits. The company also reportedly accepted liability for outstanding pension contributions and life insurance obligations.

Court documents indicate that several issues remained unresolved following the settlement, including claims relating to club membership benefits, staff development and performance bonuses, medical aid and motor vehicle benefits.

By agreement between the parties, those outstanding issues were referred back to an arbitrator for determination.

Mabuto argues that this arrangement effectively separated the dispute into two components: the settled claims governed by the deed of settlement and the unresolved matters that remained subject to arbitration.

Following hearings on the outstanding issues, an arbitrator issued an award in Mabuto's favour on March 13, 2026.

PSMI subsequently appealed the arbitral award under case number LCH422/26. However, Mabuto contends that the appeal relates only to issues determined by the arbitrator and does not affect the deed of settlement.

In his application, Mabuto argues that although the arbitrator acknowledged the settlement agreement in the award, the agreed payment of US$1.1 million was not incorporated into the operative section of the ruling because it had already been settled separately.

He maintains that the deed of settlement remains legally binding and enforceable.

"The settlement amount remains unpaid, and the obligations assumed by the respondent have not been performed," Mabuto submitted.

"The deed of settlement has not been set aside, rescinded or appealed against and continues to subsist as a valid and enforceable agreement. Its terms are clear, unequivocal and binding upon the parties."

Mabuto further argues that PSMI has never sought to challenge the validity of the settlement agreement and has failed to provide any lawful justification for non-performance.

"Despite the affluxion of time and the absence of any lawful justification for non-performance, the respondent has not paid the agreed sum exceeding US$1 100 439, nor has it fulfilled the ancillary obligations relating to pension contributions and life insurance," he said.

According to the application, registration of the settlement agreement would not conflict with the arbitral award because the two processes dealt with separate aspects of the dispute.

Mabuto maintains that the settlement resolved the bulk of the monetary claims, while arbitration addressed only those matters that had been specifically excluded from the agreement.

"This bifurcated approach was not accidental, but was the product of a deliberate and consensual arrangement between the parties," he submitted.

"As such, the registration of the deed of settlement does not in any way conflict with, undermine or duplicate the arbitral award; rather, it complements it by ensuring that all aspects of the dispute are effectively resolved and enforceable."

He further argued that the arbitrator expressly acknowledged that the settlement had resolved claims totalling US$1,100,439 and that those issues therefore fell outside the scope of the arbitration proceedings.

Mabuto is seeking an order compelling registration of the deed of settlement, which would enable enforcement of the agreement against PSMI.

The matter remains pending before the High Court.
- newsday