Mogoera and Others v MEC for the Department of Economic Development Tourism and Environmental Development (D100/16) [2018] ZALCD 2 (9 February 2018)

Mogoera and Others v MEC for the Department of Economic Development Tourism and Environmental Development (D100/16) [2018] ZALCD 2 (9 February 2018)

The applicants failed to comply with the statutory requirement to report for duty as a condition precedent to having their deemed dismissal reconsidered. The respondent was not obliged to consider their representations for reinstatement in the absence of compliance with section 17(b) of the Public Service Act. The deemed dismissal was effected by operation of law, not by employer action, and does not constitute an unfair dismissal under the Labour Relations Act. The application was dismissed with costs due to the applicants' persistent refusal to report for duty over several years while continuing to receive salaries.

Citation
[2018] ZALCD 2
Parties
Applicant: Mogoera Leepile SSM; Applicant: Kambule MP; Applicant: Mokoena KP; Respondent: MEC for the Department of Economic Development Tourism and Environmental Development
Court
Labour Court Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 February 2018
Case Number
D100/16
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Gush
Legal Topics
Public Service Act Section 17, Deemed Dismissal, Reinstatement Conditions, Condonation, Unfair Dismissal
Labour Law Public Service Act Section 17 Deemed Dismissal Reinstatement Conditions Condonation Unfair Dismissal

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mogoera Leepile SSM

Applicant

Kambule MP

Applicant

Mokoena KP

Applicant

MEC for the Department of Economic Development Tourism and Environmental Development

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants complied with the statutory condition precedent of reporting for duty under section 17(b) of the Public Service Act.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent was obliged to consider the applicants' representations for reinstatement despite non-compliance.
  3. 3 Whether the deemed dismissal constituted an unfair dismissal under the Labour Relations Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants failed to comply with the statutory requirement to report for duty as a condition precedent to having their deemed dismissal reconsidered. The respondent was not obliged to consider their representations for reinstatement in the absence of compliance with section 17(b) of the Public Service Act. The deemed dismissal was effected by operation of law, not by employer action, and does not constitute an unfair dismissal under the Labour Relations Act. The application was dismissed with costs due to the applicants' persistent refusal to report for duty over several years while continuing to receive salaries.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The applicants’ application is dismissed with costs.