Judgment in the case of a police captain who claims she was twice overlooked for a senior position because she is white was reserved in the Labour Court on Thursday.

This, following marathon arguments which pitted the country's constitution and the Employment Equity Act against each other.

Counsel representing Captain Renate Barnard, on behalf of trade union Solidarity, argued discrimination and unfair labour practices.

Police counsel William Mokhare disputed this, maintaining that the South African Police Service was obliged to redress injustices of the past.

In his closing argument on Thursday, Barnard's advocate John Grogan SC said it was the duty of the court to determine the balance between an individual's right to equality and the employer's duty to maintain employment equity standards.

"The applicant is asking for a finding that there was unfair conduct that prevented her from getting what she should have gotten had this discrimination not been perpetrated.

"Captain [Renate] Barnard was not appointed because her appointment would have frustrated the achievement of the Employment Equity Act... nothing more than logic is required to draw the inference from the evidence," Grogan said.

Barnard, an officer with 20 years' experience, applied for a senior position in a unit dealing with public grievances in 2005 and again in 2006.

She was not appointed on both occasions despite the interview panel recommending her for the post as the best of the three recommended candidates.

A reason advanced by then national police commissioner Jackie Selebi was that Barnard's appointment was not representative of the police's employment equity goals, a senior superintendent who testified on behalf of the police told the court on Monday.

"He [Selebi] wanted to ensure that all units adhered to the Employment Equity Act, in line with equity plans of the South African Police Service," said Senior Superintendent Johannes Phetolo Ramothoka.

"The appointment of the candidate [Barnard] was not going to be in line with guidelines provided by the equity guidelines. White females were over-represented by five at salary level nine so her appointment would have meant an over-representativity on that level," he said.

Barnard broke down on Wednesday while testifying to the contrary.

She said it was unfair for the police to redress injustices of the past at a "disadvantage to others".

"I am aware [of the Employment Equity Act] but also aware that there's a constitution. According to the constitution, the police have to provide equal opportunities to its officers.

"Two wrongs don't make a right... not at a disadvantage of others," said Barnard, who cried as she testified.

It was also discriminatory for the police to overlook competence and commitment based on people's skin colour, she said.

"I want to ask management, what must I do more to get a promotion? I sacrificed my family to do my job properly... I am a top performer."

She said her promotion would have enhanced services rendered to community members as she knew what went on at station level and had worked with members of the public for a number of years.

"I had practical experience of what happens at detective units. I knew I'd be able to make an impact with regard to what happens at ground level... I fitted the job description," she said.

Ramothoka denied this in his evidence, maintaining that service delivery had not been affected by the failure to appoint her "because she would have still attended to complaints from the public".

However, a former commissioner who headed the employment selection panel disagreed with him when testifying in court on Tuesday.

"Those below her would have worked harder, seeing that there was room for improvement within the department," said Abraham Johannes Burger.

He had twice recommended Barnard for the post because "she was competent" he told the court.

"I recommended that she be appointed... that there was a vast difference between her and the next candidate and also because of her competence," he said.

Grogan wrapped up his case by asking Judge Paul Pretorius to order that the policy had unfairly discriminated against Barnard on the basis of race.

He also urged him to order that Barnard be retrospectively promoted with effect from December 1, 2005 and that the police pay the legal costs incurred by Solidarity and Barnard.

Mokhare asked Pretorius to instead dismiss the case with costs.