Dube and Others v University of Zululand and Others (D956/17) [2018] ZALCD 22; [2019] 3 BLLR 285 (LC) (8 November 2018)

Dube and Others v University of Zululand and Others (D956/17) [2018] ZALCD 22; [2019] 3 BLLR 285 (LC) (8 November 2018)

The court held that the applicants failed to establish a reasonable expectation that their fixed term contracts would be renewed. The University’s operational requirements, specifically the reduction in demand for dining hall services due to changes in the NASFAS funding model, justified its decision not to renew the contracts. The automatic termination clause in the employment contracts was clear and valid, and the commissioner’s reliance on documentary evidence regarding operational losses was proper. The review test is one of correctness, and the commissioner’s finding that no dismissal occurred under section 186(1)(b) of the LRA was correct. The review application was therefore...

Citation
[2018] ZALCD 22
Parties
Applicant: Hlengiwe Dube and 63 Others; Respondent: University of Zululand; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Berlin Nayager
Court
Labour Court Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 November 2018
Case Number
D956/17
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
The review application is dismissed.
Judges
Nkutha-Nkontwana
Legal Topics
Fixed Term Contracts, Reasonable Expectation, Automatic Termination Clause, Unfair Dismissal, Section 186 1 B, Review of Arbitration Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Fixed Term Contracts Reasonable Expectation Automatic Termination Clause Unfair Dismissal Section 186 1 B Review of Arbitration 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 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hlengiwe Dube and 63 Others

Applicant

University of Zululand

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Berlin Nayager

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants were dismissed as contemplated by section 186(1)(b) of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants had a reasonable expectation that their fixed term contracts would be renewed.
  3. 3 Whether the commissioner committed a reviewable misconduct in finding no reasonable expectation of renewal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicants failed to establish a reasonable expectation that their fixed term contracts would be renewed. The University’s operational requirements, specifically the reduction in demand for dining hall services due to changes in the NASFAS funding model, justified its decision not to renew the contracts. The automatic termination clause in the employment contracts was clear and valid, and the commissioner’s reliance on documentary evidence regarding operational losses was proper. The review test is one of correctness, and the commissioner’s finding that no dismissal occurred under section 186(1)(b) of the LRA was correct. The review application was therefore...

Court Disposition

The review application is dismissed.

Orders

  • The review application is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.