Makofane and Others v Patroland Special School and Others (JS696/2021) [2021] ZALCJHB 371 (20 October 2021)

Makofane and Others v Patroland Special School and Others (JS696/2021) [2021] ZALCJHB 371 (20 October 2021)

The applicants failed to plead breach of contract or specify the contractual terms allegedly breached. Their main argument relied on section 198B(5) of the Labour Relations Act, but this became moot after termination. The Labour Court does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate alleged unlawful terminations of employment contracts; such disputes must be referred to the CCMA. The application was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2021] ZALCJHB 371
Parties
Applicant: Ditiro Makofane; Applicant: Berel Maholobela; Applicant: Delivia Mashabela; Respondent: Patroland Special School; Respondent: Department of Education Nkangala District Manager; Respondent: MEC for Education Mpumalanga
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 October 2021
Case Number
JS696/2021
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Judges
F. Coetzee
Legal Topics
Fixed Term Contracts, Unlawful Termination, Jurisdiction, Section 198b Lra, Discrimination
Labour Law Fixed Term Contracts Unlawful Termination Jurisdiction Section 198b Lra Discrimination

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

Ditiro Makofane

Applicant

Berel Maholobela

Applicant

Delivia Mashabela

Applicant

Patroland Special School

Respondent

Department of Education Nkangala District Manager

Respondent

MEC for Education Mpumalanga

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the termination of the applicants' contracts of employment was invalid.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants' contracts were indefinite in duration under section 198B(5) of the Labour Relations Act.
  3. 3 Whether the Labour Court has jurisdiction to adjudicate the alleged unlawful termination.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants failed to plead breach of contract or specify the contractual terms allegedly breached. Their main argument relied on section 198B(5) of the Labour Relations Act, but this became moot after termination. The Labour Court does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate alleged unlawful terminations of employment contracts; such disputes must be referred to the CCMA. The application was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.