Erasmus v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR36/04) [2009] ZALC 206 (15 September 2009)
The court found that, after considering the grounds raised by the applicant and the submissions of both parties, there are no reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion. The evidence and legal principles applied in the original judgment were sound, and the applicant failed to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2009] ZALC 206
- Parties
- Applicant: Colin Clinton Erasmus; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Terry Moodley N.O.; Respondent: Telkom SA Limited
- Court
- Labour Court
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- JR36/04
- Procedural Posture
- Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Review Application
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
- Judges
- Molahlehi
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Review of Arbitration Award, Reasonable Prospects of Success
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Colin Clinton Erasmus
Applicant
Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Respondent
Terry Moodley N.O.
Respondent
Telkom SA Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Review Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated reasonable prospects that another court may reach a different conclusion.
- 2 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the dismissal of the review application.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, after considering the grounds raised by the applicant and the submissions of both parties, there are no reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion. The evidence and legal principles applied in the original judgment were sound, and the applicant failed to demonstrate any basis for leave to appeal. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Orders
- The application for leave to appeal to the Labour Appeal Court is dismissed.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
HELD IN JOHANNESBURG
NOT REPORTABLE
CASE NO: JR36/04
In the matter between:
COLIN CLINTON ERASMUS APPLICANT
and
COMMISSION FOR CONCILIATION,
MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION 1ST RESPONDENT
TERRY MOODLEY N.O. 2ND RESPONDENT
TELKOM SA LIMITED 3RD RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
Molahlehi J
Introduction
This is an application for leave to appeal against my judgment handed down on 19th February 2009, in which I dismissed the review application of the applicant.
The applicant in this application for leave to appeal has raised several points which he calls grounds for leave to appeal. I do not deem it necessary to repeat those points in this judgment.
In terms of section 166(1) of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995, a party whishing to appeal to the Labour Appeal Court against a judgment of the Labour Court has to obtain leave to do so from the Labour Court. The test to apply when considering whether or not to grant leave to appeal is whether there is a reasonable prospect that another Court may come to a different conclusion to that of the Labour Court.
I have carefully considered the points raised by the applicant in his application for leave to appeal to the Labour Appeal Court. I have also considered my judgment including the submissions made by both parties. Having regard to conspectus of the evidence which was presented before me and the legal principles applied, I am not persuaded that there are reasonable prospects that another Court could come to a different conclusion to the one reached by me in my judgment.
In the circumstances the application for leave to appeal to the Labour Appeal Court is dismissed with no order as to costs.
_______________
Date of Judgment : 15th September 2009
(Application decided on papers)
1