Health and Other Services Personnel Trade Union of South Africa (HOSPERSA) and Others v MEC for Health, KwaZulu-Natal and Another (D283/19) [2021] ZALCD 58 (26 July 2021)
The court found that the submissions in support of the application for leave to appeal did not introduce any new arguments beyond those previously considered. Upon reconsideration of the evidence and conclusions reached in the initial judgment, the court was not persuaded that there were reasonable prospects of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] ZALCD 58
- Parties
- Applicant: Health and Other Services Personnel Trade Union of South Africa (HOSPERSA); Applicant: Paul George Shaun Cotchobos; Applicant: Rajandran Perumalsami Appadu; Respondent: Member of the Executive Council Responsible for Health, KwaZulu-Natal; Respondent: Department of Health, KwaZulu-Natal
- Court
- Labour Court Durban
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- D283/19
- Procedural Posture
- Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal refused.
- Judges
- P Schumann
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Prospects of Success, Superior Courts Act
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Health and Other Services Personnel Trade Union of South Africa (HOSPERSA)
Applicant
Paul George Shaun Cotchobos
Applicant
Rajandran Perumalsami Appadu
Applicant
Member of the Executive Council Responsible for Health, KwaZulu-Natal
Respondent
Department of Health, KwaZulu-Natal
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the previous judgment.
- 2 Whether the application for leave to appeal discloses reasonable prospects of success as required by Section 17(1)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the submissions in support of the application for leave to appeal did not introduce any new arguments beyond those previously considered. Upon reconsideration of the evidence and conclusions reached in the initial judgment, the court was not persuaded that there were reasonable prospects of success on appeal as required by Section 17(1)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act. Accordingly, leave to appeal was refused.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal refused.
Orders
- Leave to appeal is refused.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, DURBAN
Reportable
CASE NO: D283/19
In the matter between:
THE HEALTH AND OTHER SERVICES
PERSONNEL TRADE UNION OF SOUTH AFRICA
(“HOSPERSA”) First Applicant
PAUL GEORGE SHAUN COTCHOBOS Second Applicant
RAJANDRAN PERUMALSAMI APPADU Third Applicant
and
THE MEMBER OF THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
RESPONSIBLE FOR HEALTH, KWAZULU-NATAL First Respondent
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, KWAZULU-NATAL Second Respondent
Heard: 21 June 2021
Delivered: This judgment was handed down electronically by circulation to the parties and / or their legal representatives by email. The date and time for handing-down is deemed 10h00 on 26 July 2021.
Summary: Opposed Application
JUDGMENT: APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
Schumann, AJ
1] Leave to appeal is sought against my previous judgement in this matter. The application was brought some months ago and submissions were filed but, unfortunately, the application was only brought to my attention in the second week of June 2021.
2] I have considered the submissions in support of the application and they add nothing particularly new to what was submitted when the matter was previously argued. I have reconsidered the evidence and the conclusions I drew in light of the material before me and I am unpersuaded· that an appeal would have reasonable prospects of success as envisaged by Section 17 (1)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act, 10 of 2013.
2.1] Leave to appeal is, accordingly, refused.
P Schumann
Acting Judge of the Labour Court of South Africa