Deep Blue Ocean Trading 787 CC t/a Avemel and Another v DETAWU on behalf of Six Members and Others (D247/2022) [2022] ZALCD 48 (20 September 2022)
The court found that the purported section 197 transfer agreement between the applicants did not comply with statutory requirements, as it failed to specify the values of accrued benefits and did not properly apportion liability. However, the arbitration award was subsequently varied to make only the second applicant liable for payment to the third respondent. The second applicant's argument that payment could not be made without tax directives was rejected, as the payment was to the bargaining council and not directly to employees, and the relevant tax provisions did not apply. The applicants failed to establish a clear right to the relief sought, did not demonstrate irreparable harm,...
- Citation
- [2022] ZALCD 48
- Parties
- Applicant: Deep Blue Ocean Trading 787 CC t/a Avemel Logistics CC; Applicant: Big V Holdings (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: DETAWU on behalf of Six Members; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: National Bargaining Council for the Road Freight Logistics Industry; Respondent: Sheriff of the High and Low Court Chatsworth – Ms Hlophe N.O.
- Court
- Labour Court Durban
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 20 September 2022
- Case Number
- D247/2022
- Procedural Posture
- Stay Application / Final Determination of Application for Stay and Interdict
- Outcome
- Application dismissed with costs.
- Judges
- Allen-Yaman
- Legal Topics
- Section 197 Transfer, Joint and Several Liability, Tax Directives, Enforcement of Award, Remuneration, Costs Order
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Deep Blue Ocean Trading 787 CC t/a Avemel Logistics CC
Applicant
Big V Holdings (Pty) Ltd
Applicant
DETAWU on behalf of Six Members
Respondent
Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Respondent
National Bargaining Council for the Road Freight Logistics Industry
Respondent
Sheriff of the High and Low Court Chatsworth – Ms Hlophe N.O.
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Final Determination of Application for Stay and Interdict
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the first applicant is liable for the indebtedness arising from the compliance order and arbitration award.
- 2 Whether the second applicant is entitled to withhold payment pending tax directives for the employees.
- 3 Whether the applicants are entitled to a stay of enforcement and interdict against attachment of property.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the purported section 197 transfer agreement between the applicants did not comply with statutory requirements, as it failed to specify the values of accrued benefits and did not properly apportion liability. However, the arbitration award was subsequently varied to make only the second applicant liable for payment to the third respondent. The second applicant's argument that payment could not be made without tax directives was rejected, as the payment was to the bargaining council and not directly to employees, and the relevant tax provisions did not apply. The applicants failed to establish a clear right to the relief sought, did not demonstrate irreparable harm,...
Court Disposition
Application dismissed with costs.
Orders
- The application is dismissed.
- The first and second applicants are directed to pay the third respondent's costs, including costs reserved on 17 June 2022 and 26 July 2022, jointly and severally, the one paying, the other to be absolved.
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