Makaukau v Moiloa and Others (J633/2016) [2016] ZALCJHB 450 (6 December 2016)
- Citation
- [2016] ZALCJHB 450
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Panel
- R Harper
- Case number
- J633/2016
More details
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Panel
- R Harper
- Case number
- J633/2016
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Court found that, given the parties had reached agreement on the merits and there were no exceptional circumstances warranting a costs order, it would be inappropriate to award costs for the proceedings held on 15 June 2016 and 8 July 2016. The Labour Court generally refrains from awarding costs unless there are compelling reasons, such as frivolous or vexatious conduct, which were not present in this case.
Court disposition
No order as to costs for the proceedings on 15 June 2016 and 8 July 2016.
Orders
- No order is granted in respect of costs for the proceedings held on 15 June 2016.
- No order is granted in respect of the costs for the proceedings held on 8 July 2016.
02
Material facts
Parties
George Makaukau
Applicant Counsel: Adv M MarcusRamotshere Moiloa Local Municipality
Respondent Counsel: Adv X D MatyoloThomas Phakane
Respondent Counsel: Adv X D Matyolo03
Procedural history
Posture
Urgent Application / Costs Determination Following Settlement on Merits
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
Whether the Labour Court should award costs for the proceedings held on 15 June 2016 and 8 July 2016 after the parties settled the merits but failed to agree on costs.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant submitted that no agreement was reached regarding costs and requested the Court to determine the issue. The applicant did not advance specific grounds for or against the awarding of costs.
- Respondent
- The respondent indicated that while the parties had resolved the merits of the dispute, they could not agree on costs for the specified proceedings and left the matter for the Court's determination. No substantive argument for costs was advanced.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Labour Court practice; see Zungu v Premier of KwaZulu-Natal and Others [2006] 4 BLLR 409 (D)
It is inappropriate to grant costs where parties have resolved the merits and no exceptional circumstances justify a costs order.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Court found that, given the parties had reached agreement on the merits and there were no exceptional circumstances warranting a costs order, it would be inappropriate to award costs for the proceedings held on 15 June 2016 and 8 July 2016. The Labour Court generally refrains from awarding costs unless there are compelling reasons, such as frivolous or vexatious conduct, which were not present in this case.
Obiter and limits
- The Court encouraged parties to attempt settlement before proceeding with litigation, especially where the dispute is capable of resolution.
- Voluminous papers and repeated hearings should prompt parties to seek resolution to avoid unnecessary costs.
Court disposition
No order as to costs for the proceedings on 15 June 2016 and 8 July 2016.
- No order is granted in respect of costs for the proceedings held on 15 June 2016.
- No order is granted in respect of the costs for the proceedings held on 8 July 2016.
Source and reliance status
Labour Court Johannesburg
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Labour Court Johannesburg
Judgment
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
JUDGMENT
Not Reportable
Case no: J633/2016
In the matter between:
GEORGE
MAKAUKAU Applicant And
RAMOTSHERE MOILOA
LOCAL MUNICIPALITY
THOMAS PHAKANE First Respondent Second Respondent
Heard: 8 July 2016
Delivered: 06 December 2016
Summary: Dispute resolved by the parties – no agreement on costs – Labour Court asked to rule on costs – inappropriate circumstances – no costs granted
HARPER, AJ
Introduction:
1. During the hearing of this matter the Court enquired whether the parties had made any effort to resolve the dispute. The Counsel for the parties advised that the parties had made no such effort.
2. The Court noted that the papers were voluminous, there had been past hearings and it may be opportune for the parties to attempt to resolve the matter.
3. Counsel for the Respondent advised that there was a possibility that the parties could resolve the matter. The Court then adjourned the proceedings for one (1) hour in order to allow the parties to attempt to negotiate a settlement.
4. The negotiations were thereafter facilitated in Chambers and the parties finally reached agreement on the merits of the dispute but indicated that they could not reach agreement on the awarding of costs for the proceedings on 15 June 2016 and 8 July 2016.
5. They accordingly advised that the Court would be left to deal with the awarding of costs.
6. I have considered the request and have concluded that it would be inappropriate to grant costs in respect of both proceedings in these circumstances.
7. I accordingly rule as follows:-
7.1 No order is granted in respect of costs for the proceedings held on 15 June 2016;
7.2 No order is granted in respect of the costs for the proceedings held on 8 July 2016.
______
R Harper
Acting Judge of the Labour Court of South Africa
APPEARANCES:
On behalf of the Applicant: Adv M Marcus
Instructed by:
Lebea & Associates
On behalf of the Respondent: Adv X D Matyolo
Instructed by:
RS Tau Attorneys
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.