Leboea and Others v LSG Sky Chefs (Pty) Ltd (JS 340/07) [2013] ZALCJHB 154 (4 July 2013)

Leboea and Others v LSG Sky Chefs (Pty) Ltd (JS 340/07) [2013] ZALCJHB 154 (4 July 2013)

The court found that the original notice of motion was fatally defective and that the subsequent amendment could not cure its fundamental flaws, including the lack of invitation to oppose and absence of signature. The application for leave to file a supplementary affidavit was refused because the applicant sought to make out a new case not contained in the founding affidavit, which is impermissible once an answering affidavit has been filed. The applicant failed to show good cause for its absence when default judgment was granted, as there was no proof of service of opposition papers and no adequate explanation for the procedural errors. The court held that reinstatement of the...

Citation
[2013] ZALCJHB 154
Parties
Applicant: Stella Leboea & Others; Respondent: LSG Sky Chefs (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 July 2013
Case Number
JS 340/07
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Rescission of Default Judgment and Related Orders
Outcome
Application for rescission dismissed with costs. Reinstatement and back-pay arrangements confirmed.
Judges
Memani
Legal Topics
Rescission of Judgment, Default Judgment, Supplementary Affidavit, Unfair Dismissal, Reinstatement, Back Pay
Labour Law Civil Procedure Rescission of Judgment Default Judgment Supplementary Affidavit Unfair Dismissal Reinstatement Back Pay

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

Parties

Stella Leboea & Others

Applicant

LSG Sky Chefs (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Rescission of Default Judgment and Related Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defective notice of motion could be cured by amendment.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant established good cause for rescission of the default judgment.
  3. 3 Whether the supplementary affidavit should be admitted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the original notice of motion was fatally defective and that the subsequent amendment could not cure its fundamental flaws, including the lack of invitation to oppose and absence of signature. The application for leave to file a supplementary affidavit was refused because the applicant sought to make out a new case not contained in the founding affidavit, which is impermissible once an answering affidavit has been filed. The applicant failed to show good cause for its absence when default judgment was granted, as there was no proof of service of opposition papers and no adequate explanation for the procedural errors. The court held that reinstatement of the...

Court Disposition

Application for rescission dismissed with costs. Reinstatement and back-pay arrangements confirmed.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.
  • The applicant may take the respondents in tranches over a period not exceeding three months from the date of this order, provided that those respondents who are not required to resume their duties immediately shall be entitled to remuneration as if they were actually reporting for duty.