Moabelo v Gold Fields Group Services (Pty) Ltd (JS492/15) [2018] ZALCJHB 140 (29 March 2018)
- Citation
- [2018] ZALCJHB 140
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Panel
- YF Saloojee
- Case number
- JS492/15
More details
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Panel
- YF Saloojee
- Case number
- JS492/15
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court held that discovery is intended to assist parties and the court in uncovering the truth and resolving litigation, but is limited to documents relevant to the issues as pleaded. The applicant's claims are contractual and relate to performance bonuses, recalculation, payment under appointment, and negligent misrepresentation. The court agreed with the respondent that documents relating to other employees would be relevant only to an unfair labour practice dispute, which was not pleaded. However, the court found that the respondent must disclose documents relating to the applicant, as these are relevant to the pleaded issues. The applicant is therefore entitled to discovery of documents pertaining to his claims, but not to documents relating to other employees or to fairness of the Remco decision, as no such case was made out in the pleadings.
Court disposition
The application for discovery is granted in part; the respondent is ordered to produce documents relevant to the applicant's pleaded claims. Each party is to pay their own costs.
Orders
- The respondent is ordered to produce the documentation specified in prayer 1, limited to prayer 1.5.1, within 10 days.
- Each party is to pay their own costs.
02
Material facts
Parties
Kgabo Moabelo
ApplicantGold Fields Group Services (Pty) Ltd
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Discovery Application / Ex Tempore Judgment
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the applicant is entitled to discovery of documents under rule 6(9)(b) and rule 11 of the Labour Court rules.
- 02
Whether the documents sought are relevant to the issues as pleaded by the applicant.
- 03
Whether the applicant's claims constitute an unfair labour practice or are limited to contractual and misrepresentation claims.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant seeks an order compelling the respondent to produce specific documentation within 10 days, relying on rule 6(9)(b) and rule 11 of the Labour Court rules. The applicant argues that discovery is necessary to establish the truth and resolve the litigation, and that the documents requested are relevant to the claims based on contract, performance bonus, recalculation for 2014, payment under the letter of appointment, and negligent misrepresentation.
- Respondent
- The respondent contends that certain documents requested by the applicant pertain to other employees and would amount to an unfair labour practice dispute, which is not pleaded by the applicant. The respondent opposes disclosure of these documents, arguing that only documents relevant to the applicant's pleaded case should be disclosed.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Labour Court Rule 6(9)(b)
Discovery is permitted only in respect of documents relevant to the issues as defined by the pleadings.
- 02
Various case law cited in oral judgment
A party may obtain inspection or copies of relevant documentation based solely on the pleadings.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court held that discovery is intended to assist parties and the court in uncovering the truth and resolving litigation, but is limited to documents relevant to the issues as pleaded. The applicant's claims are contractual and relate to performance bonuses, recalculation, payment under appointment, and negligent misrepresentation. The court agreed with the respondent that documents relating to other employees would be relevant only to an unfair labour practice dispute, which was not pleaded. However, the court found that the respondent must disclose documents relating to the applicant, as these are relevant to the pleaded issues. The applicant is therefore entitled to discovery of documents pertaining to his claims, but not to documents relating to other employees or to fairness of the Remco decision, as no such case was made out in the pleadings.
Obiter and limits
- Discovery should not be used to expand the scope of litigation beyond the issues defined in the pleadings.
- Parties must ensure that their pleadings clearly set out the basis for any claims to avoid unnecessary disputes over relevance in discovery.
Court disposition
The application for discovery is granted in part; the respondent is ordered to produce documents relevant to the applicant's pleaded claims. Each party is to pay their own costs.
- The respondent is ordered to produce the documentation specified in prayer 1, limited to prayer 1.5.1, within 10 days.
- Each party is to pay their own costs.
Source and reliance status
Labour Court Johannesburg
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Labour Court Johannesburg
Judgment
REPUBLIC
OF SOUTH AFRICA
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
JUDGMENT
Not Reportable
Not of interest to other judges
Case No: JS 492/15
In the matter between:
KGABO
MOABELO Applicant And
GOLD FIELDS GROUP SERVICES (PTY) LTD Respondent
Heard: 09 June 2017
Delivered: 09 June 2017
Edited: 29 March 2018
EX
TEMPORE JUDGMENT
SALOOJEE
AJ
INTRODUCTION
[1] This is an application in which the applicant seeks to direct the respondent within 10 days of the order to produce certain documentation. The applicant relies on rule 6(9)(b) of the Labour Court’s rules, as well as rule 11. Rule 6(9)(b) states that:
“If parties cannot reach an agreement regarding the discovery of documents and tape recordings, either party may apply to the court for an appropriate order, including an order as to costs.”
[2] Now, discovery assists the parties and the court in discovering the truth and to lead to a determination of any litigation, and parties are entitled to discovery only once legal issues are settled, and the settling of issues allows the court in its discretion to determine the relevance of documents in an application of this kind. There is also a long list of cases that have held that a party may only obtain an inspection or obtain copies of relevant documentation based on the pleadings or the issues on the pleadings and on the pleadings alone.
[3] Now, the applicant’s case in the Statement of Claim is based on contract. The applicant seeks a performance bonus in its first claim, in its second claim it seeks a recalculation of this bonus for the year 2014, payment in terms of his letter of appointment, and a claim for negligent representation. On the first to third claims, the applicant relies on his Letter of Appointment, the Group Annual Incentive Scheme and the Retrenchment Agreement, and on the fourth claim for negligent misrepresentation, the applicant relies on an email that allegedly induced the applicant to act.
[4] In as far as the respondent’s argument is made that certain documents required by the applicant that refer to other employees would point to an unfair labour practice dispute. I agree with the respondent on that regard, however, I cannot agree with the respondent in not allowing or not disclosing certain documentation that was requested. For this reason I am inclined to look at the recordings or documents that relate only to the applicant because no unfair labour practice case has been made out. In as far as the applicant would like to rely on the reasonableness or the fairness of the Remco decision that case is not made out in its pleadings.
ORDER
1. For this reason I am inclined to grant an order in terms of prayer 1, with regard to prayer 1.5.1.
2. Each party to pay their own costs.
_____
YF Saloojee
Acting Judge of the Labour Court of South Africa
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.