Glencore Operations South Africa (Pty) Ltd v NUM obo Maripane and Others (JR1906/14) [2017] ZALCJHB 147 (11 May 2017)

Glencore Operations South Africa (Pty) Ltd v NUM obo Maripane and Others (JR1906/14) [2017] ZALCJHB 147 (11 May 2017)

The application for leave to appeal does not meet the statutory threshold under section 17 of the Superior Courts Act. The first respondent's arguments do not demonstrate a reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion. The respondent's conduct constituted material breaches of employment...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] ZALCJHB 147
Parties
Applicant: Glencore Operations South Africa (Pty) Ltd (Lion Ferrochrome); Respondent: NUM obo Simon Maripane; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Simon Mohubedu Rantho N.O.
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 May 2017
Case Number
JR1906/14
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Review Judgment
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed; costs awarded against the applicant.
Judges
R Harper
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award, Costs Order
Labour Law Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Dismissal Review of Arbitration Award Costs Order

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Glencore Operations South Africa (Pty) Ltd (Lion Ferrochrome)

Applicant

NUM obo Simon Maripane

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Simon Mohubedu Rantho N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Review Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first respondent has reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the review and cross-review judgment.
  2. 2 Whether the application for leave to appeal meets the statutory threshold under section 17 of the Superior Courts Act.
  3. 3 Whether the conduct of the first respondent justified dismissal and the refusal of compensation.

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal does not meet the statutory threshold under section 17 of the Superior Courts Act. The first respondent's arguments do not demonstrate a reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion. The respondent's conduct constituted material breaches of employment obligations, and the employer's instructions were lawful. The application for leave to appeal is essentially a repetition of arguments already considered and does not provide compelling reasons for reconsideration. Accordingly, the application is dismissed and costs are awarded against the applicant.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed; costs awarded against the applicant.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal against the finding of this Court in respect of the outcome of the review and the cross-review is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the first respondent.