Fipaza v Eskom Holdings Ltd and Others (JR 2220/08) [2010] ZALC 169 (17 November 2010)

Fipaza v Eskom Holdings Ltd and Others (JR 2220/08) [2010] ZALC 169 (17 November 2010)

The court found that paragraph 40 of the original judgment was an incomplete and redundant passage, constituting a patent error. In terms of section 165(b) of the Labour Relations Act, the court is empowered to correct such errors. The judge ordered the deletion of paragraph 40 and the renumbering of the remaining...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2010] ZALC 169
Parties
Applicant: Nokwanda Patience Fipaza; Respondent: Eskom Holding Ltd; Respondent: Commissioner Loyd Maponya N.O.; Respondent: The Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Case Number
JR 2220/08
Procedural Posture
Variation Application / Variation of Judgment
Outcome
Paragraph 40 of the judgment is deleted and the remaining paragraphs are renumbered accordingly.
Judges
R Lagrange
Legal Topics
Variation of Judgment, Patent Error, Labour Relations Act
Labour Law Variation of Judgment Patent Error Labour Relations Act

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nokwanda Patience Fipaza

Applicant

Eskom Holding Ltd

Respondent

Commissioner Loyd Maponya N.O.

Respondent

The Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Variation Application / Variation of Judgment

  1. 1 Whether paragraph 40 of the original judgment contained a patent error requiring correction under section 165(b) of the Labour Relations Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that paragraph 40 of the original judgment was an incomplete and redundant passage, constituting a patent error. In terms of section 165(b) of the Labour Relations Act, the court is empowered to correct such errors. The judge ordered the deletion of paragraph 40 and the renumbering of the remaining paragraphs to ensure the judgment accurately reflects the court's intention.

Court Disposition

Paragraph 40 of the judgment is deleted and the remaining paragraphs are renumbered accordingly.

Orders

  • Paragraph 40 of the judgment is deleted.
  • The remaining paragraphs are renumbered accordingly in terms of section 165(b) of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995.