Mabunda v Hutchinson and Others (J 130 /16) [2016] ZALCJHB 345 (8 September 2016)

Mabunda v Hutchinson and Others (J 130 /16) [2016] ZALCJHB 345 (8 September 2016)

The court held that the order striking the application off the roll for lack of urgency was not a final judgment or order as contemplated by section 166(1) of the Labour Relations Act. The applicant is not precluded from pursuing his dispute in the ordinary course, and the order did not finally determine the rights of the parties. Consequently, no appeal lies against such an order, and the application for leave to appeal is dismissed as incompetent.

Citation
[2016] ZALCJHB 345
Parties
Applicant: Aukney Clifford Mabunda; Respondent: Wayne Hutchinson; Respondent: Goodluck Phumzile Tshelane; Respondent: Mochubela Seekoe; Respondent: Zizamele Mbambo/Zukile Zibi; Respondent: The South African Nuclear Energy Corporation (SOC) Ltd (NECSA); Respondent: Itayi Gwaunza
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 September 2016
Case Number
J 130 /16
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following an Ex Tempore Judgment Striking the Matter Off the Roll for Lack of Urgency.
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Prinsloo
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Striking Off Roll, Urgency, Costs Order
Labour Law Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Striking Off Roll Urgency Costs Order

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aukney Clifford Mabunda

Applicant

Wayne Hutchinson

Respondent

Goodluck Phumzile Tshelane

Respondent

Mochubela Seekoe

Respondent

Zizamele Mbambo/Zukile Zibi

Respondent

The South African Nuclear Energy Corporation (SOC) Ltd (NECSA)

Respondent

Itayi Gwaunza

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following an Ex Tempore Judgment Striking the Matter Off the Roll for Lack of Urgency.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order striking the application off the roll for lack of urgency is appealable.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to leave to appeal against the order of 2 February 2016.
  3. 3 Whether the order was final and definitive of the parties' rights.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the order striking the application off the roll for lack of urgency was not a final judgment or order as contemplated by section 166(1) of the Labour Relations Act. The applicant is not precluded from pursuing his dispute in the ordinary course, and the order did not finally determine the rights of the parties. Consequently, no appeal lies against such an order, and the application for leave to appeal is dismissed as incompetent.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.