Fipaza v Eskom Holdings Ltd and Others (JR 2220/08) [2010] ZALC 169 (17 November 2010)
- Citation
- [2010] ZALC 169
- Status
- Order
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Labour Court
- Panel
- R Lagrange
- Case number
- JR 2220/08
More details
- Court
- Labour Court
- Panel
- R Lagrange
- Case number
- JR 2220/08
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
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.
- A copy of the amended judgment is attached.
02
Material facts
Parties
Nokwanda Patience Fipaza
ApplicantEskom Holding Ltd
RespondentCommissioner Loyd Maponya N.O.
RespondentThe Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Variation Application / Variation of Judgment
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
Whether paragraph 40 of the original judgment contained a patent error requiring correction under section 165(b) of the Labour Relations Act.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant did not make submissions regarding the variation; the matter was brought to the judge's attention as a clerical error.
- Respondent
- The respondents did not oppose or make submissions regarding the correction; the issue was a patent error in the judgment.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995, section 165(b)
A court may correct patent errors in its judgment in terms of section 165(b) of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
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.
Obiter and limits
- The correction does not affect the substance of the judgment or the rights of the parties.
Court disposition
Paragraph 40 of the judgment is deleted and the remaining paragraphs are renumbered accordingly.
- 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.
- A copy of the amended judgment is attached.
Source and reliance status
Labour Court
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Labour Court
Order
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(HELD AT JOHANNESBURG)
CASE NO: JR 2220/08
In the matter between:
NOKWANDA
PATIENCE FIPAZA ….................................................................Applicant
and
ESKOM
HOLDING LTD …..........................................................................1st Respondent
COMMISSIONER LOYD MAPONYA N.O. ….........................................2nd Respondent
THE
COMMISSION FOR CONCILIATION
MEDIATION
AND ARBITRATION …......................................................3rd Respondent
VARIATION OF JUDGMENT
LAGRANGE, AJ
It has been brought to my attention that paragraph 40 of my judgment in this matter is incomplete.
It appears to have been a redundant incomplete passage which ought to have been deleted and is a patent error.
Accordingly, paragraph 40 the judgment is deleted and the remaining paragraphs renumbered accordingly in terms of section 165(b) of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995.
A copy of the judgment as amended is attached hereto.
ROBERT
LAGRANGE
ACTING
JUDGE OF THE LABOUR COURT
Date of Variation: 17 November 2010
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.