Edcon Ltd v Steenkamp and Others (JA125/2017) [2017] ZALAC 81; [2018] 3 BLLR 230 (LAC); (2018) 39 ILJ 531 (LAC) (18 December 2017)

Edcon Ltd v Steenkamp and Others (JA125/2017) [2017] ZALAC 81; [2018] 3 BLLR 230 (LAC); (2018) 39 ILJ 531 (LAC) (18 December 2017)

The Labour Appeal Court held that section 189A(13) of the LRA is intended for urgent judicial intervention during an ongoing retrenchment process and is not available as a remedy long after dismissals have taken place. The remedies in section 189A(13)(a)-(d) must be read together, with compensation under (d) only available if the other remedies are inappropriate. The respondents' explanation for the delay, based on reliance on an overturned legal principle (the De Beers Principle), is not acceptable in law. The abandonment of the procedural unfairness claim and pursuit of an invalidity claim was a litigation risk, and the subsequent attempt to seek condonation years later is not...

Citation
[2017] ZALAC 81
Parties
Appellant: Edcon Ltd; Respondent: Steenkamp, Karin and 1817 Others
Court
Labour Appeal Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 December 2017
Case Number
JA125/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Labour Court Order Granting Condonation and Consolidation of Late Section 189 A(13) Applications
Outcome
Appeal upheld. Labour Court order set aside. Respondents' application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Musi, Coppin, Sutherland
Legal Topics
Retrenchment Procedure, Section 189a Lra, Condonation, Procedural Fairness, Compensation Remedy, Jurisdiction of Labour Court
Labour Law Retrenchment Procedure Section 189a Lra Condonation Procedural Fairness Compensation Remedy Jurisdiction of Labour Court

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

Edcon Ltd

Appellant

Steenkamp, Karin and 1817 Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Labour Court Order Granting Condonation and Consolidation of Late Section 189 A(13) Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether condonation for the late filing of a section 189A(13) application years out of time was properly granted.
  2. 2 Whether section 189A(13)(d) of the LRA provides a self-standing remedy for compensation for procedural unfairness.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents' explanation for delay, based on reliance on an overturned legal principle, constitutes good cause for condonation.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Appeal Court held that section 189A(13) of the LRA is intended for urgent judicial intervention during an ongoing retrenchment process and is not available as a remedy long after dismissals have taken place. The remedies in section 189A(13)(a)-(d) must be read together, with compensation under (d) only available if the other remedies are inappropriate. The respondents' explanation for the delay, based on reliance on an overturned legal principle (the De Beers Principle), is not acceptable in law. The abandonment of the procedural unfairness claim and pursuit of an invalidity claim was a litigation risk, and the subsequent attempt to seek condonation years later is not...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld. Labour Court order set aside. Respondents' application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld.
  • The order of the Labour Court is set aside.