Gubevu Security Group (Pty) Ltd v Ruggiero NO and Others (C 481/10) [2011] ZALCCT 29; [2012] 4 BLLR 354 (LC); (2012) 33 ILJ 1171 (LC) (11 November 2011)

Gubevu Security Group (Pty) Ltd v Ruggiero NO and Others (C 481/10) [2011] ZALCCT 29; [2012] 4 BLLR 354 (LC); (2012) 33 ILJ 1171 (LC) (11 November 2011)

The court held that the arbitrator correctly found the employee had a reasonable expectation of renewal of her fixed term contract, based on the employer's communications and conduct. The Labour Court confirmed that the proper test for review in such matters is jurisdictional, not the Sidumo test, and that the arbitrator's award of compensation for two months was appropriate and not reviewable. The court emphasized that section 186(1)(b) does not entitle an employee to permanent employment, but only to renewal of the fixed term contract or compensation. The application for review was dismissed, and costs were awarded against the applicant.

Citation
[2011] ZALCCT 29
Parties
Applicant: Gubevu Security Group (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Ruggiero N.O.; Respondent: CCMA; Respondent: M Langeveldt
Court
Labour Court Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 November 2011
Case Number
C 481/10
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Application for review dismissed with costs.
Judges
Steenkamp
Legal Topics
Fixed Term Contracts, Reasonable Expectation of Renewal, Unfair Dismissal, Compensation, Jurisdiction of Ccma
Labour Law Fixed Term Contracts Reasonable Expectation of Renewal Unfair Dismissal Compensation Jurisdiction of Ccma

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gubevu Security Group (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Ruggiero N.O.

Respondent

CCMA

Respondent

M Langeveldt

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the employee had a reasonable expectation that her fixed term contract would be renewed.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator correctly found that the employee was unfairly dismissed under section 186(1)(b) of the LRA.
  3. 3 Whether the Sidumo test or a jurisdictional review applies to the arbitrator's award.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the arbitrator correctly found the employee had a reasonable expectation of renewal of her fixed term contract, based on the employer's communications and conduct. The Labour Court confirmed that the proper test for review in such matters is jurisdictional, not the Sidumo test, and that the arbitrator's award of compensation for two months was appropriate and not reviewable. The court emphasized that section 186(1)(b) does not entitle an employee to permanent employment, but only to renewal of the fixed term contract or compensation. The application for review was dismissed, and costs were awarded against the applicant.

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for review is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the respondent's costs.