Mohlala v Citibank and Others (J4638/02) [2003] ZALC 148 (18 February 2003)

Mohlala v Citibank and Others (J4638/02) [2003] ZALC 148 (18 February 2003)

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate a reasonable prospect that the Labour Appeal Court would reach a different conclusion regarding the refusal to stay disciplinary proceedings pending criminal proceedings. The judge reaffirmed the reasoning in the original judgment, noting that the applicant had not shown exceptional circumstances warranting a stay. The application for leave to appeal was therefore dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2003] ZALC 148
Parties
Applicant: Mohlala, Tshwari Phineas; Respondent: Citibank, N.A.; Respondent: Makola, C.M. N.O.; Respondent: Hartman, Johan N.O.; Respondent: Van Wyk, Joani N.O.
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 February 2003
Case Number
J4638/02
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Urgent Application
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
E Revelas
Legal Topics
Stay of Disciplinary Proceedings, Leave to Appeal, Urgent Application
Labour Law Civil Procedure Stay of Disciplinary Proceedings Leave to Appeal Urgent Application

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohlala, Tshwari Phineas

Applicant

Citibank, N.A.

Respondent

Makola, C.M. N.O.

Respondent

Hartman, Johan N.O.

Respondent

Van Wyk, Joani N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Urgent Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a reasonable prospect that the Labour Appeal Court would reach a different conclusion regarding the stay of disciplinary proceedings pending criminal proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether leave to appeal should be granted after the dismissal of the urgent application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate a reasonable prospect that the Labour Appeal Court would reach a different conclusion regarding the refusal to stay disciplinary proceedings pending criminal proceedings. The judge reaffirmed the reasoning in the original judgment, noting that the applicant had not shown exceptional circumstances warranting a stay. The application for leave to appeal was therefore dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.