AMCU and Others v Piet Wes Civils CC and Another (J2834/16, J2845/16) [2017] ZALCJHB 7; (2017) 38 ILJ 1128 (LC); [2017] 5 BLLR 501 (LC) (13 January 2017)
The court found that the employment contracts were not genuinely fixed term as contemplated by s 198B of the LRA, but were either of unlimited duration or must be deemed indefinite. The termination of the Exxaro contracts did not constitute a specified event justifying automatic termination of employment. The respondents failed to discharge the onus of proving a justifiable reason for fixed term contracts. As a result, the employees were dismissed for operational requirements without the required consultation under s 189 and s 189A. The appropriate remedy under s 189A(13) is reinstatement of the employees until the employers have complied with a fair procedure, except for certain Piet Wes...
- Citation
- [2017] ZALCJHB 7
- Parties
- Applicant: AMCU; Applicant: AMCU MEMBERS; Respondent: PIET WES CIVILS CC; Respondent: WATERKLOOF SKOONMAAKDIENSTE CC
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 13 January 2017
- Case Number
- J2834/16, J2845/16
- Procedural Posture
- Urgent Application / Application for Urgent Relief Under S 189 A(13) of the Lra; Judgment Delivered After Consolidation of Two Applications
- Outcome
- Application granted in part; employees reinstated pending proper consultation, except for certain Piet Wes employees whose dispute is referred to oral evidence.
- Judges
- Steenkamp
- Legal Topics
- Fixed Term Contracts, Large Scale Retrenchment, Consultation Requirements, Section 189a Application, Termination for Operational Requirements
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
AMCU
Applicant
AMCU MEMBERS
Applicant
PIET WES CIVILS CC
Respondent
WATERKLOOF SKOONMAAKDIENSTE CC
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Urgent Relief Under S 189 A(13) of the Lra; Judgment Delivered After Consolidation of Two Applications
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the employees were dismissed for operational requirements or their fixed term contracts terminated by operation of law.
- 2 Whether the employment contracts were genuinely fixed term as contemplated by s 198B of the LRA.
- 3 Whether the respondents were required to consult with AMCU and the employees in terms of s 189 and s 189A of the LRA.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the employment contracts were not genuinely fixed term as contemplated by s 198B of the LRA, but were either of unlimited duration or must be deemed indefinite. The termination of the Exxaro contracts did not constitute a specified event justifying automatic termination of employment. The respondents failed to discharge the onus of proving a justifiable reason for fixed term contracts. As a result, the employees were dismissed for operational requirements without the required consultation under s 189 and s 189A. The appropriate remedy under s 189A(13) is reinstatement of the employees until the employers have complied with a fair procedure, except for certain Piet Wes...
Court Disposition
Application granted in part; employees reinstated pending proper consultation, except for certain Piet Wes employees whose dispute is referred to oral evidence.
Orders
- The respondents, Piet Wes Civils CC and Waterkloof Skoonmaakdienste CC, are ordered to reinstate the employees listed in each application, except as set out below.
- The respondents are ordered to reinstate the employees as contemplated in s 189A(13) of the LRA until they have complied with a fair procedure.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment