Marula Platinum Proprietary Limited v Commissioner for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1679/19) [2022] ZALCJHB 6 (7 February 2022)
The court reconsidered the judgment, the application for leave to appeal, and the written submissions. It found that the applicant had established reasonable prospects of success on appeal and that another court, presented with the same facts, might reach a different conclusion. Accordingly, leave to appeal was...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] ZALCJHB 6
- Parties
- Applicant: Marula Platinum Proprietary Limited; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner Donald Kglalake Mkadimeng; Respondent: Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union on behalf of Bethuel Sekome
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- JR1679/19
- Procedural Posture
- Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Review
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal is granted.
- Judges
- M.T. M. Phehane
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Review of Arbitration Award, Substantive Fairness of Dismissal
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Marula Platinum Proprietary Limited
Applicant
Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Respondent
Commissioner Donald Kglalake Mkadimeng
Respondent
Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union on behalf of Bethuel Sekome
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Review
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has reasonable prospects of success on appeal.
- 2 Whether another court may reach a different conclusion on the same facts.
Ratio Decidendi
The court reconsidered the judgment, the application for leave to appeal, and the written submissions. It found that the applicant had established reasonable prospects of success on appeal and that another court, presented with the same facts, might reach a different conclusion. Accordingly, leave to appeal was granted.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal is granted.
Orders
- The application for leave to appeal is granted.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
Not Reportable
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
Case no: JR1679/19
In the matter between:
MARULA PLATINUM PROPRIETARY LIMITED
Applicant
and
COMMISSION FOR CONCILATION, MEDIATION
AND ARBITRATION First Respondent
COMMISSIONER DONALD KGLALAKE
MKADIMENG Second Respondent
ASSOCIATION OF MINEWORKERS AND CONSTRUCTION
UNION ON BEHALF OF BETHUEL SEKOME Third Respondent
Decided: In Chambers
Delivered: 7 February 2022 (In view of the measures implemented as a result of the Covid-19 outbreak, this judgment was handed down electronically by circulation to the parties' representatives by email. The date for hand-down is deemed to be on 7 February 2022)
JUDGMENT
APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
PHEHANE, J
Introduction
[1] The applicant seeks leave to appeal against the judgment and order of this Court, handed down on 4 August 2021, in terms of which the arbitration award by the second respondent was reviewed and set aside and substituted with an order that the dismissal of the third respondent, Mr. Sekome, is substantively fair. The application is unopposed.
Test to succeed in an application for leave to appeal
[2] It is a trite principle in our law that in order to be entitled to leave to appeal, an applicant must convince the Court that it has reasonable prospects of success on appeal.[1] Further, there has to exist, a likelihood that another Court, presented with the same facts, would come to a different conclusion.
[3] I have once more considered the judgment, the application for leave to appeal and the written submissions filed. I am persuaded that the applicant has made out a case for the granting of leave to appeal.
[4] In the premises, I make the following order:
Order
1. The application for leave to appeal is granted.
M.T. M. Phehane
Judge of the Labour Court of South Africa
[1] Section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act, Act 10 of 2013.