Makhunga and Another v SALGBC (JR430/11) [2018] ZALCJHB 209 (21 June 2018)

Makhunga and Another v SALGBC (JR430/11) [2018] ZALCJHB 209 (21 June 2018)

The court found that the applicants failed to prove that their representative was a member of IMATU, the relevant trade union, at the time of the arbitration hearing on 26 November 2010. The salary advice submitted by the applicants was dated after the hearing and did not establish membership at the material time. The court held that mere employment with the third respondent did not confer locus standi to represent the applicants under rule 25(2)(iii) of the SALGBC Rules, which requires union membership. The arbitrator's award was found to be correct and unassailable, and the application for review was dismissed.

Citation
[2018] ZALCJHB 209
Parties
Applicant: B Makhunga & Another; Respondent: SALGBC; Respondent: K Mamba; Respondent: City of Johannesburg
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 June 2018
Case Number
JR 430/11
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Judges
Sello
Legal Topics
Representation in Arbitration, Collective Agreement Enforcement, Locus Standi, Review of Arbitration Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Representation in Arbitration Collective Agreement Enforcement Locus Standi Review of Arbitration Award

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

B Makhunga & Another

Applicant

SALGBC

Respondent

K Mamba

Respondent

City of Johannesburg

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants' representative had locus standi to represent them in arbitration proceedings before the SALGBC.
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator erred in applying rule 25 of the SALGBC Rules regarding representation.
  3. 3 Whether the evidence submitted by the applicants established the representative's membership in the relevant trade union at the material time.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to prove that their representative was a member of IMATU, the relevant trade union, at the time of the arbitration hearing on 26 November 2010. The salary advice submitted by the applicants was dated after the hearing and did not establish membership at the material time. The court held that mere employment with the third respondent did not confer locus standi to represent the applicants under rule 25(2)(iii) of the SALGBC Rules, which requires union membership. The arbitrator's award was found to be correct and unassailable, and the application for review was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.