Kenco Engineering CC v National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) obo Members (JA29/16) [2017] ZALAC 84 (1 August 2017)

Kenco Engineering CC v National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) obo Members (JA29/16) [2017] ZALAC 84 (1 August 2017)

The Labour Appeal Court held that Kenco Engineering CC failed to discharge its onus to prove that the selection criteria for retrenchment—skills, work performance, attendance records, and safety records—were applied in a fair and objective manner. No sufficient evidence was presented to enable the Labour Court to assess whether the criteria were properly implemented. The substantive fairness of the dismissals was placed in dispute by NUMSA, and the employer did not demonstrate that the affected employees were evaluated according to the stated criteria. The Labour Court was correct in finding the retrenchment substantively unfair and awarding compensation. The appeal was dismissed, and the...

Citation
[2017] ZALAC 84
Parties
Appellant: Kenco Engineering CC; Respondent: National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) obo Members
Court
Labour Appeal Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 August 2017
Case Number
JA29/16
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Judgment and Order of Labour Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; Labour Court's order upheld.
Judges
Waglay, Kathree-Setiloane, Phatshoane
Legal Topics
Retrenchment, Selection Criteria, Substantive Fairness, Compensation, Onus of Proof
Labour Law Civil Procedure Retrenchment Selection Criteria Substantive Fairness Compensation Onus of Proof

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenco Engineering CC

Appellant

National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) obo Members

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Judgment and Order of Labour Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the employer proved that the selection criteria for retrenchment were fairly and objectively applied.
  2. 2 Whether the retrenchment of the individual respondents was substantively unfair.
  3. 3 Whether the Labour Court erred in awarding compensation to the retrenched employees.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Appeal Court held that Kenco Engineering CC failed to discharge its onus to prove that the selection criteria for retrenchment—skills, work performance, attendance records, and safety records—were applied in a fair and objective manner. No sufficient evidence was presented to enable the Labour Court to assess whether the criteria were properly implemented. The substantive fairness of the dismissals was placed in dispute by NUMSA, and the employer did not demonstrate that the affected employees were evaluated according to the stated criteria. The Labour Court was correct in finding the retrenchment substantively unfair and awarding compensation. The appeal was dismissed, and the...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; Labour Court's order upheld.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.
  • Kenco Engineering CC is to pay each of the 19 individual respondents eight months’ remuneration within 14 days from the date of the Labour Court order.