Majokweni and Others v Minister of Defence and Military Veterans and Others (21576/22) [2022] ZAGPPHC 272 (3 May 2022)

Majokweni and Others v Minister of Defence and Military Veterans and Others (21576/22) [2022] ZAGPPHC 272 (3 May 2022)

The court found that the applicants failed to exhaust internal remedies, as they had already lodged complaints with the Military Ombud and had alternative avenues for relief. The application was not urgent, given that the dispute was being addressed in another forum and a review process could still follow. The applicants did not provide sufficient explanation regarding their cannabis use, nor did they adhere to procedural requirements such as bringing the application under Rule 53 or requesting reasons for the decision. The court declined to condone non-compliance with the rules and struck the application from the roll with costs.

Citation
[2022] ZAGPPHC 272
Parties
Applicant: Ezam Indipile Majokweni; Applicant: Onalerona Yeti Mokeona; Applicant: Phidelia Zanele Sithole; Applicant: Mthuzi Wilson Shikwambana; Respondent: Minister of Defence and Military Veterans; Respondent: Department of South African Defence; Respondent: Chief of the South African National Defence Force; Respondent: Secretary of Defence; Respondent: Chief of the South African Air Force
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 May 2022
Case Number
21576/22
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application Struck From the Roll
Outcome
Application struck from the roll with costs.
Judges
E van der Schyff
Legal Topics
Termination of Service, Internal Remedies Exhaustion, Audi Alteram Principle, Urgent Interdict, Military Ombud Complaint
Administrative Law Labour Law Termination of Service Internal Remedies Exhaustion Audi Alteram Principle Urgent Interdict Military Ombud Complaint

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

Ezam Indipile Majokweni

Applicant

Onalerona Yeti Mokeona

Applicant

Phidelia Zanele Sithole

Applicant

Mthuzi Wilson Shikwambana

Applicant

Minister of Defence and Military Veterans

Respondent

Department of South African Defence

Respondent

Chief of the South African National Defence Force

Respondent

Secretary of Defence

Respondent

Chief of the South African Air Force

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application Struck From the Roll

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the termination of the applicants' service with the South African National Defence Force was lawful and valid.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants were entitled to be reinstated with full retrospective effect.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants' right to privacy was infringed by the respondents.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to exhaust internal remedies, as they had already lodged complaints with the Military Ombud and had alternative avenues for relief. The application was not urgent, given that the dispute was being addressed in another forum and a review process could still follow. The applicants did not provide sufficient explanation regarding their cannabis use, nor did they adhere to procedural requirements such as bringing the application under Rule 53 or requesting reasons for the decision. The court declined to condone non-compliance with the rules and struck the application from the roll with costs.

Court Disposition

Application struck from the roll with costs.

Orders

  • The applicants' non-compliance with the forms and service prescribed in the Uniform Rules of Court is not condoned.
  • The application is struck from the roll with costs.