Lanzaye and Others v Freddy Hirsch Group (Pty) Limited (J954/98) [1998] ZALC 12 (12 May 1998)

Lanzaye and Others v Freddy Hirsch Group (Pty) Limited (J954/98) [1998] ZALC 12 (12 May 1998)

The court found that the applicants had not discharged the onus of proving that the respondent failed to comply with section 189 of the Labour Relations Act regarding consultation prior to retrenchment. There were disputes of fact on the papers, particularly regarding whether adequate consultation occurred and whether the respondent had disclosed all necessary information. The court held that such disputes are best resolved through conciliation or trial, not on affidavit in urgent proceedings. The applicants failed to refer the dispute about disclosure of information to the CCMA, as required by the Act. The court concluded that it could not grant the final mandatory order sought by the...

Citation
[1998] ZALC 12
Parties
Applicant: Food and Allied Workers Union; Applicant: Billy Lanzaye and 25 Others; Respondent: Freddy Hirsch Group (Pty) Limited
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 May 1998
Case Number
J954/98
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Return Day of Interim Order; Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for final relief refused; leave to appeal granted; interim order remains effective pending appeal.
Judges
Revelas
Legal Topics
Retrenchment Procedure, Consultation Requirements, Mandatory Interdict, Adequacy of Consultation, Alternative Remedies, Leave to Appeal
Labour Law Civil Procedure Retrenchment Procedure Consultation Requirements Mandatory Interdict Adequacy of Consultation Alternative Remedies Leave to Appeal

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Food and Allied Workers Union

Applicant

Billy Lanzaye and 25 Others

Applicant

Freddy Hirsch Group (Pty) Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Return Day of Interim Order; Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent complied with section 189 of the Labour Relations Act regarding consultation prior to retrenchment.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants are entitled to a final mandatory order compelling consultation.
  3. 3 Whether disputes of fact regarding consultation can be resolved on affidavit in urgent proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had not discharged the onus of proving that the respondent failed to comply with section 189 of the Labour Relations Act regarding consultation prior to retrenchment. There were disputes of fact on the papers, particularly regarding whether adequate consultation occurred and whether the respondent had disclosed all necessary information. The court held that such disputes are best resolved through conciliation or trial, not on affidavit in urgent proceedings. The applicants failed to refer the dispute about disclosure of information to the CCMA, as required by the Act. The court concluded that it could not grant the final mandatory order sought by the...

Court Disposition

Application for final relief refused; leave to appeal granted; interim order remains effective pending appeal.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is granted.
  • The interim order granted on 30 April 1998 remains effective until finalisation of the appeal.