Litsoane and Others v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others (J4115/18) [2018] ZALCJHB 405 (28 November 2018)

Litsoane and Others v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others (J4115/18) [2018] ZALCJHB 405 (28 November 2018)

The court found that the applicants failed to establish urgency, as they delayed bringing the application for several months after becoming aware of the respondents' intention to appoint new board members. The applicants did not provide sufficient explanation for the delay or demonstrate why the court's rules should be dispensed with. The court held that the applicants' reliance on the respondents' promise to consult was unreasonable and that the underlying dispute could have been referred to the bargaining council as required by the Labour Relations Act. The application was therefore dismissed for lack of urgency, and the court awarded costs against the applicants, including costs of two...

Citation
[2018] ZALCJHB 405
Parties
Applicant: Tladi Moses Litsoane; Applicant: Annexure 'TML' (Second to 29th Applicants); Respondent: Minister of Justice and Correctional Services; Respondent: National Commissioner of the Department of Correctional Services
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 November 2018
Case Number
J4115/18
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Urgent Interdict and Declaratory Relief
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Mahosi
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Reasonable Expectation of Renewal, Urgency in Labour Proceedings, Costs in Labour Matters
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Reasonable Expectation of Renewal Urgency in Labour Proceedings Costs in Labour Matters

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tladi Moses Litsoane

Applicant

Annexure 'TML' (Second to 29th Applicants)

Applicant

Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Respondent

National Commissioner of the Department of Correctional Services

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Urgent Interdict and Declaratory Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application is urgent and justifies deviation from the ordinary rules of court.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have a reasonable expectation of renewal of their contracts as members of the Correctional Supervision Parole Board.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents' conduct amounts to unlawful dismissal without following pre-dismissal procedures under the Labour Relations Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to establish urgency, as they delayed bringing the application for several months after becoming aware of the respondents' intention to appoint new board members. The applicants did not provide sufficient explanation for the delay or demonstrate why the court's rules should be dispensed with. The court held that the applicants' reliance on the respondents' promise to consult was unreasonable and that the underlying dispute could have been referred to the bargaining council as required by the Labour Relations Act. The application was therefore dismissed for lack of urgency, and the court awarded costs against the applicants, including costs of two...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • This application is dismissed with costs including costs of two counsel.