CSAAWU obo Dube and Others v Robertson Abbatoir (C315/2011) [2015] ZALCCT 19; [2015] 7 BLLR 673 (LC); (2015) 36 ILJ 2080 (LC) (23 March 2015)

CSAAWU obo Dube and Others v Robertson Abbatoir (C315/2011) [2015] ZALCCT 19; [2015] 7 BLLR 673 (LC); (2015) 36 ILJ 2080 (LC) (23 March 2015)

The applicants failed to present any direct or inferential evidence that a dismissal occurred on 30 November 2010. The evidence showed that employees were paid for that day, called to a disciplinary hearing, and only dismissed with notice on 1 December and 23 December 2010, respectively. There was no evidence that any lockout was effected to compel acceptance of a demand, as required by section 187(1)(c), nor that the dismissals were for exercising rights under section 187(1)(d). The applicants' claim was not supported by the facts or evidence led. Accordingly, the respondent's application for absolution from the instance was granted. On costs, while law would ordinarily require the...

Citation
[2015] ZALCCT 19
Parties
Applicant: CSAAWU obo Dube & others; Respondent: Robertson Abbatoir
Court
Labour Court Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 March 2015
Case Number
C315/2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Absolution From the Instance After Applicants Closed Their Case
Outcome
Absolution from the instance granted in favour of the respondent. Costs awarded against the applicant union.
Judges
Steenkamp
Legal Topics
Automatically Unfair Dismissal, Dismissal Lockout, Section 187 Lra, Absolution From Instance, Jurisdiction, Costs Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Automatically Unfair Dismissal Dismissal Lockout Section 187 Lra Absolution From Instance Jurisdiction Costs Award

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CSAAWU obo Dube & others

Applicant

Robertson Abbatoir

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Absolution From the Instance After Applicants Closed Their Case

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the applicants establish that a dismissal occurred on 30 November 2010?
  2. 2 Was any dismissal automatically unfair under section 187(1)(c) or (d) of the LRA?
  3. 3 Is the respondent entitled to absolution from the instance?

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants failed to present any direct or inferential evidence that a dismissal occurred on 30 November 2010. The evidence showed that employees were paid for that day, called to a disciplinary hearing, and only dismissed with notice on 1 December and 23 December 2010, respectively. There was no evidence that any lockout was effected to compel acceptance of a demand, as required by section 187(1)(c), nor that the dismissals were for exercising rights under section 187(1)(d). The applicants' claim was not supported by the facts or evidence led. Accordingly, the respondent's application for absolution from the instance was granted. On costs, while law would ordinarily require the...

Court Disposition

Absolution from the instance granted in favour of the respondent. Costs awarded against the applicant union.

Orders

  • The respondent, Robertson Abbatoir, is granted absolution from the instance.
  • The applicant, CSAAWU, is ordered to pay the respondent's costs, including the costs of two counsel.