Karibuni Security Services CC v MEC, Department of Health Province (2558/2017) [2020] ZANCHC 39 (26 June 2020)

Karibuni Security Services CC v MEC, Department of Health Province (2558/2017) [2020] ZANCHC 39 (26 June 2020)

The majority held that Karibuni Security Services CC was not a Temporary Employment Service (TES) as contemplated in section 198(1) of the Labour Relations Act, but rather an independent contractor providing security services. The contract between Karibuni and the Department was for the provision of services, not personnel, and the guards were not performing 'temporary service' as defined in section 198A. The court found that the protestors were not on duty at the relevant times and were not acting within the course and scope of their employment with the appellant. There was insufficient evidence to establish a direct link between the protestors' conduct and the business of Karibuni, and...

Citation
[2020] ZANCHC 39
Parties
Appellant: Karibuni Security Services CC; Respondent: MEC, Department of Health NC Province
Court
Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 June 2020
Case Number
2558/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Full Bench Appeal With Leave of the Court a Quo
Outcome
Appeal upheld. The order of the court a quo is set aside and substituted with dismissal of the application with costs.
Judges
Olivier, Mamosebo, Mayet
Legal Topics
Temporary Employment Service, Vicarious Liability, Urgent Interdict, Contractual Liability, Jurisdiction, Course and Scope of Employment
Labour Law Civil Procedure Temporary Employment Service Vicarious Liability Urgent Interdict Contractual Liability Jurisdiction Course and Scope of Employment

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Karibuni Security Services CC

Appellant

MEC, Department of Health NC Province

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Full Bench Appeal With Leave of the Court a Quo

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court a quo had jurisdiction to determine the application or interpretation of section 198A of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was an independent contractor or a Temporary Employment Service (TES) as contemplated in section 198(1) of the LRA.
  3. 3 Whether the employees were deemed to be employed by the Department or the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that Karibuni Security Services CC was not a Temporary Employment Service (TES) as contemplated in section 198(1) of the Labour Relations Act, but rather an independent contractor providing security services. The contract between Karibuni and the Department was for the provision of services, not personnel, and the guards were not performing 'temporary service' as defined in section 198A. The court found that the protestors were not on duty at the relevant times and were not acting within the course and scope of their employment with the appellant. There was insufficient evidence to establish a direct link between the protestors' conduct and the business of Karibuni, and...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld. The order of the court a quo is set aside and substituted with dismissal of the application with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld.
  • The order granted by the court a quo is set aside and substituted with: 'The rule nisi is discharged and the application is dismissed with costs.'