Dube and Others v Nasionale Sweisware (Pty) Ltd (443/96) [1998] ZASCA 52; 1998 (3) SA 956 (SCA); (1998) 19 ILJ 1033 (SCA) (29 May 1998)

Dube and Others v Nasionale Sweisware (Pty) Ltd (443/96) [1998] ZASCA 52; 1998 (3) SA 956 (SCA); (1998) 19 ILJ 1033 (SCA) (29 May 1998)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the respondent's disciplinary code provided for discretion in applying progressive discipline and did not require exhaustion of every step before dismissal. The appellants were repeatedly warned about the seriousness of their conduct and the consequences of further transgressions. Although there were procedural irregularities in the initial warnings, these did not materially affect the appellants' understanding of the consequences of their actions. Only employees on final warning were dismissed after formal enquiries, and no procedural objections were raised at those enquiries. The Court held that the repeated illegal strikes and sustained...

Citation
[1998] ZASCA 52
Parties
Appellant: Joseph Dube and 76 Others; Respondent: Nasionale Sweisware (Pty) Ltd
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 May 1998
Case Number
443/96
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Appeal Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Judges
Howie, Scott, Zulman, Streicher, Melunsky
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Unfair Labour Practice, Disciplinary Code, Progressive Discipline, Strike Action, Parity Principle
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Unfair Labour Practice Disciplinary Code Progressive Discipline Strike Action Parity Principle

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 6 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Dube and 76 Others

Appellant

Nasionale Sweisware (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Appeal Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the dismissals of the appellants constituted an unfair labour practice.
  2. 2 Whether reinstatement of all appellants was the appropriate remedy, and if not, what relief should be granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the respondent's disciplinary code provided for discretion in applying progressive discipline and did not require exhaustion of every step before dismissal. The appellants were repeatedly warned about the seriousness of their conduct and the consequences of further transgressions. Although there were procedural irregularities in the initial warnings, these did not materially affect the appellants' understanding of the consequences of their actions. Only employees on final warning were dismissed after formal enquiries, and no procedural objections were raised at those enquiries. The Court held that the repeated illegal strikes and sustained...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.