Bloem Water v Nyareli and Others (C823/2018) [2021] ZALCCT 80 (27 October 2021)
- Citation
- [2021] ZALCCT 80
- Status
- Order
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Labour Court Cape Town
- Panel
- Lagrange
- Case number
- C823/2018
More details
- Court
- Labour Court Cape Town
- Panel
- Lagrange
- Case number
- C823/2018
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that a patent error existed in the order made in the judgment delivered on 23 November 2010 and that a case citation was missing in paragraph 13. In terms of section 165 of the Labour Relations Act, the court is empowered to correct such errors. The judgment was accordingly varied to rectify the identified mistakes, with the amended text underlined in the attached varied judgment.
Court disposition
The judgment delivered on 23 November 2010 is varied to correct the patent error in the order and to insert the missing case citation in paragraph 13.
Orders
- The errors identified in the judgment handed down on 23 November 2010 are rectified as set out in the varied judgment attached.
- The amended text is underlined in the varied judgment.
02
Material facts
Parties
Bloem Water
ApplicantK Nyareli
RespondentM Gobusang
RespondentDavid Fanapi (N.O.)
RespondentThe Commission for Mediation, Conciliation & Arbitration
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Variation Application / Order Varying Previous Judgment
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether there was a patent error in the order made in the judgment handed down on 23 November 2010.
- 02
Whether the omission of a case citation in paragraph 13 of the judgment required rectification.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant submitted that the judgment delivered on 23 November 2010 contained a patent error in the operative order and that a case citation was omitted in paragraph 13, necessitating correction.
- Respondent
- The respondents did not oppose the application for variation, and no substantive argument was advanced against the rectification of the judgment.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Section 165 of the Labour Relations Act, 66 of 1995
A court may vary its own judgment or order to correct patent errors or omissions.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that a patent error existed in the order made in the judgment delivered on 23 November 2010 and that a case citation was missing in paragraph 13. In terms of section 165 of the Labour Relations Act, the court is empowered to correct such errors. The judgment was accordingly varied to rectify the identified mistakes, with the amended text underlined in the attached varied judgment.
Obiter and limits
- The correction of patent errors in judgments is necessary to ensure the accuracy and integrity of court orders.
- The omission of a case citation, while minor, should be rectified to maintain proper legal referencing.
Court disposition
The judgment delivered on 23 November 2010 is varied to correct the patent error in the order and to insert the missing case citation in paragraph 13.
- The errors identified in the judgment handed down on 23 November 2010 are rectified as set out in the varied judgment attached.
- The amended text is underlined in the varied judgment.
Source and reliance status
Labour Court Cape Town
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Labour Court Cape Town
Order
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA,
HELD
AT CAPE TOWN
Reportable
Case no:C823/2018
In the matter between:
BLOEM WATER Applicant
And
K NYARELI First
Respondent
M GOBUSANG Second
Respondent
DAVID FANAPI (N.O.) Third
Respondent
THE COMMISSION FOR MEDIATION,
CONCILIATION & ARBITRATION Fourth
Respondent
VARIATION
OF JUDGMENT
LAGRANGE J
[1] It has been brought to my attention that there was a patent error in the order made in this judgment handed down on 23 November 2010. It also came to my attention that a case citation in paragraph 13 of the judgment was missing.
[2] The errors are rectified in the varied judgment attached with the amended text underlined.
Lagrange J
Judge of the Labour Court of South Africa
(In Chambers)
27 October 2021
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.