City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality v Maree NO and Others (J2098/18) [2018] ZALCJHB 355 (6 November 2018)

City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality v Maree NO and Others (J2098/18) [2018] ZALCJHB 355 (6 November 2018)

The court found that the existence of conflicting judgments regarding section 145(7) and (8) of the Labour Relations Act creates sufficient uncertainty to warrant consideration by a higher court. The applicant's grounds for leave to appeal, particularly the issue of conflicting judgments, are persuasive. The court...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] ZALCJHB 355
Parties
Applicant: City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality; Respondent: E Maree N.O; Respondent: Sekgala and Others [2003 Group] and Machete and Others [2012 Group]; Respondent: Sheriff of the High Court for the District of Pretoria (Freddy Batt N.O)
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Case Number
J2098/18
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Order Dated 29 January 2018.
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted.
Judges
S Mabaso
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Conflicting Judgments, Section 145 Lra, Review of Arbitration Awards
Labour Law Leave to Appeal Conflicting Judgments Section 145 Lra Review of Arbitration Awards

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality

Applicant

E Maree N.O

Respondent

Sekgala and Others [2003 Group] and Machete and Others [2012 Group]

Respondent

Sheriff of the High Court for the District of Pretoria (Freddy Batt N.O)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Order Dated 29 January 2018.

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted in light of conflicting judgments regarding section 145(7) and (8) of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether another court may reach a different conclusion on the interpretation of section 145(7) and (8) of the LRA.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the existence of conflicting judgments regarding section 145(7) and (8) of the Labour Relations Act creates sufficient uncertainty to warrant consideration by a higher court. The applicant's grounds for leave to appeal, particularly the issue of conflicting judgments, are persuasive. The court concluded that another court may reasonably reach a different conclusion on the interpretation of the relevant statutory provisions. Accordingly, leave to appeal is granted.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is granted.
  • Costs will be costs in the appeal.