AMCU v Council of Mines of South Africa and Others (JS 611/2016) [2023] ZALCJHB 20 (22 February 2023)

AMCU v Council of Mines of South Africa and Others (JS 611/2016) [2023] ZALCJHB 20 (22 February 2023)

The court found that both the applicant and the first respondent raised important questions of law and that there are compelling reasons for the appeal to be heard. The court was satisfied that the requirements for leave to appeal, as set out in section 17(1)(a)(ii) of the Superior Courts Act, were met. Accordingly,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] ZALCJHB 20
Parties
Applicant: Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union; Respondent: Council of Mines of South Africa; Respondent: National Union of Mineworkers; Respondent: UASA; Respondent: Solidarity
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Case Number
JS 611/2016
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal is granted. No order as to costs.
Judges
Prinsloo
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Reasonable Prospects of Success, Compelling Reason for Appeal, Superior Courts Act
Labour Law Leave to Appeal Reasonable Prospects of Success Compelling Reason for Appeal Superior Courts Act

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union

Applicant

Council of Mines of South Africa

Respondent

National Union of Mineworkers

Respondent

UASA

Respondent

Solidarity

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have demonstrated reasonable prospects of success on appeal.
  2. 2 Whether there are compelling reasons for the appeal to be heard as contemplated by section 17(1)(a)(ii) of the Superior Courts Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that both the applicant and the first respondent raised important questions of law and that there are compelling reasons for the appeal to be heard. The court was satisfied that the requirements for leave to appeal, as set out in section 17(1)(a)(ii) of the Superior Courts Act, were met. Accordingly, leave to appeal was granted.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal is granted. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is granted.
  • There is no order as to costs.