Geyser v MEC for Transport Kwazulu-Natal (D1210/2000) [2000] ZALC 149; (2001) 22 ILJ 440 (LC) (14 November 2000)

Geyser v MEC for Transport Kwazulu-Natal (D1210/2000) [2000] ZALC 149; (2001) 22 ILJ 440 (LC) (14 November 2000)

The Court held that compliance with section 39 of the Public Service Act is not a jurisdictional prerequisite for applications for interim relief or for making interim relief final. The applicant could and should have given better notice to the respondent, but his failure to do so did not bar the Court from having jurisdiction, as urgency was established. On the merits, the Court found that the applicant was given an opportunity to be heard through the IMSSA mediation process, and his reasons for not attending the meeting were unconvincing. The evidence supported the respondent's version that the applicant was aware of the purpose of the meeting and chose not to attend. Disputes of fact...

Citation
[2000] ZALC 149
Parties
Applicant: Ashley-Dean Gary Geyser; Respondent: MEC for Transport Kwazulu-Natal
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 November 2000
Case Number
D1210/2000
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Return Date of Rule Nisi; Opposed Application for Review and Final Relief
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Pillay
Legal Topics
Public Service Act, Audi Alteram Partem, Urgent Application, Jurisdictional Prerequisite, Review of Administrative Action
Labour Law Administrative Law Public Service Act Audi Alteram Partem Urgent Application Jurisdictional Prerequisite Review of Administrative Action

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

Ashley-Dean Gary Geyser

Applicant

MEC for Transport Kwazulu-Natal

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Return Date of Rule Nisi; Opposed Application for Review and Final Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether compliance with section 39 of the Public Service Act is a jurisdictional prerequisite for interim relief and final orders.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was afforded a hearing prior to the decision to transfer him.
  3. 3 Whether the transfer constituted disciplinary action requiring referral for conciliation and arbitration.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that compliance with section 39 of the Public Service Act is not a jurisdictional prerequisite for applications for interim relief or for making interim relief final. The applicant could and should have given better notice to the respondent, but his failure to do so did not bar the Court from having jurisdiction, as urgency was established. On the merits, the Court found that the applicant was given an opportunity to be heard through the IMSSA mediation process, and his reasons for not attending the meeting were unconvincing. The evidence supported the respondent's version that the applicant was aware of the purpose of the meeting and chose not to attend. Disputes of fact...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.