Mbana v Shepstone & Wylie (CCT85/14) [2015] ZACC 11; 2015 (6) BCLR 693 (CC); (2015) 36 ILJ 1805 (CC) (7 May 2015)

Mbana v Shepstone & Wylie (CCT85/14) [2015] ZACC 11; 2015 (6) BCLR 693 (CC); (2015) 36 ILJ 1805 (CC) (7 May 2015)

The Constitutional Court found that the respondent's recruitment policy was applied rationally and justified by operational needs, and that deviations for other candidates did not amount to unfair discrimination against the applicant on the grounds of race, social origin, or any arbitrary ground. The applicant failed to demonstrate that the policy or its application was irrational, discriminatory, or unfair. The claim of bias was not substantiated, as the applicant did not raise the issue timeously and the judge's prior association with the respondent ended years before his appointment to the bench, which did not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. The costs orders granted by...

Citation
[2015] ZACC 11
Parties
Applicant: Yonela Mbana; Respondent: Shepstone & Wylie
Court
Constitutional Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 May 2015
Case Number
CCT85/14
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Constitutional Court From the Labour Court and Supreme Court of Appeal.
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed; no order as to costs.
Judges
Mogoeng CJ, Cameron J, Froneman J, Jappie AJ, Khampepe J, Madlanga J, Nkabinde J, Theron AJ, Tshiqi AJ
Legal Topics
Unfair Discrimination, Employment Equity Act, Reasonable Apprehension of Bias, Costs Awards, Burden of Proof, Judicial Impartiality
Labour Law Constitutional Law Unfair Discrimination Employment Equity Act Reasonable Apprehension of Bias Costs Awards Burden of Proof Judicial Impartiality

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 5 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yonela Mbana

Applicant

Shepstone & Wylie

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Constitutional Court From the Labour Court and Supreme Court of Appeal.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's recruitment policy and its application constituted direct or indirect unfair discrimination against the applicant on the grounds of race, social origin, or an arbitrary ground.
  2. 2 Whether the Labour Court judge was biased or there was a reasonable apprehension of bias due to his prior association with the respondent.
  3. 3 Whether the costs orders granted by the Labour Court and Supreme Court of Appeal should be set aside.

Ratio Decidendi

The Constitutional Court found that the respondent's recruitment policy was applied rationally and justified by operational needs, and that deviations for other candidates did not amount to unfair discrimination against the applicant on the grounds of race, social origin, or any arbitrary ground. The applicant failed to demonstrate that the policy or its application was irrational, discriminatory, or unfair. The claim of bias was not substantiated, as the applicant did not raise the issue timeously and the judge's prior association with the respondent ended years before his appointment to the bench, which did not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. The costs orders granted by...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.