Makinana and Others v Harbron t/a Harbron Quarries and Groenendal Boerdery (P285/07) [2013] ZALCPE 2; [2013] 6 BLLR 591 (LC); (2013) 34 ILJ 2618 (LC) (14 February 2013)

Makinana and Others v Harbron t/a Harbron Quarries and Groenendal Boerdery (P285/07) [2013] ZALCPE 2; [2013] 6 BLLR 591 (LC); (2013) 34 ILJ 2618 (LC) (14 February 2013)

The court held that the CCMA in limine ruling, which determined that the respondent was the employer, constitutes a jurisdictional fact necessary for the adjudication of the unfair dismissal dispute. Since the respondent did not challenge or review the ruling, it remains binding for the purposes of the trial. The respondent's objection to the founding affidavit was dismissed as irrelevant to the effect of the CCMA rulings. The court found that neither res judicata nor issue estoppel strictly applied, but the respondent is bound by the CCMA ruling unless and until it is set aside. The respondent's continued denial of his status as employer is impermissible in light of the unchallenged ruling.

Citation
[2013] ZALCPE 2
Parties
Applicant: Thembasile Justice Makinana & 15 Others; Respondent: Albert Muller Harbron t/a Harbron Quarries and Groenendal Boerdery
Court
Labour Court Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 February 2013
Case Number
P285/07
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application to Declare CCMA Ruling Binding for Trial Purposes
Outcome
Application granted. The respondent is bound by the CCMA in limine ruling identifying him as the employer for the purposes of the trial. Costs awarded to the applicants.
Judges
D H Gush
Legal Topics
Identity of Employer, Issue Estoppel, Res Judicata, Automatically Unfair Dismissal, Ccma Jurisdiction, Review of Arbitration Award
Labour Law Identity of Employer Issue Estoppel Res Judicata Automatically Unfair Dismissal Ccma Jurisdiction 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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thembasile Justice Makinana & 15 Others

Applicant

Albert Muller Harbron t/a Harbron Quarries and Groenendal Boerdery

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Application to Declare CCMA Ruling Binding for Trial Purposes

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the CCMA in limine ruling identifying the respondent as the employer is binding for the purposes of the trial.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent is entitled to deny being the applicants' employer despite the CCMA ruling.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's objection to the founding affidavit as hearsay is valid.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the CCMA in limine ruling, which determined that the respondent was the employer, constitutes a jurisdictional fact necessary for the adjudication of the unfair dismissal dispute. Since the respondent did not challenge or review the ruling, it remains binding for the purposes of the trial. The respondent's objection to the founding affidavit was dismissed as irrelevant to the effect of the CCMA rulings. The court found that neither res judicata nor issue estoppel strictly applied, but the respondent is bound by the CCMA ruling unless and until it is set aside. The respondent's continued denial of his status as employer is impermissible in light of the unchallenged ruling.

Court Disposition

Application granted. The respondent is bound by the CCMA in limine ruling identifying him as the employer for the purposes of the trial. Costs awarded to the applicants.

Orders

  • The in limine ruling issued under the auspices of the CCMA under case number P2971-05 that the respondent is the employer and correct respondent in this matter, unless reviewed and set aside, is binding on the respondent for the purposes of the trial.
  • The respondent is ordered to pay the applicants' costs.