Moir and Others v Autopax Passenger Services (Pty) Ltd (JS797/10) [2014] ZALCJHB 92; (2014) 35 ILJ 3199 (LC) (25 March 2014)

Moir and Others v Autopax Passenger Services (Pty) Ltd (JS797/10) [2014] ZALCJHB 92; (2014) 35 ILJ 3199 (LC) (25 March 2014)

The central issue is whether the Labour Court has jurisdiction to entertain a dispute concerning the interpretation and application of a collective agreement. The Court finds that such disputes, in terms of section 24 of the Labour Relations Act, fall within the jurisdiction of the CCMA or a bargaining council, unless the agreement provides otherwise. The agreement in question contains a dispute resolution clause requiring referral to private arbitration. The applicants were dismissed after the agreement was concluded, but the agreement's duration extended beyond their dismissal and the facts giving rise to their dismissal were related to those addressed by the agreement. However, the...

Citation
[2014] ZALCJHB 92
Parties
Applicant: Steven Moir & 12 Others; Respondent: Autopax Passenger Services (Pty) Ltd t/a Translux and City-to-City
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 March 2014
Case Number
JS797/10
Procedural Posture
Unfair Dismissal Application / Jurisdictional Challenge Before Merits
Outcome
Applicants' statement of case dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; no order as to costs.
Judges
Molahlehi
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Collective Agreement Interpretation, Jurisdiction of Labour Court, Private Arbitration Clause
Labour Law Unfair Dismissal Collective Agreement Interpretation Jurisdiction of Labour Court Private Arbitration Clause

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Steven Moir & 12 Others

Applicant

Autopax Passenger Services (Pty) Ltd t/a Translux and City-to-City

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Unfair Dismissal Application / Jurisdictional Challenge Before Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the Labour Court have jurisdiction to determine a dispute concerning the interpretation and application of a collective agreement?
  2. 2 Does the collective agreement concluded prior to the applicants' dismissal apply to them?
  3. 3 Is the arbitration clause in the collective agreement valid and does it oust the Labour Court's jurisdiction?

Ratio Decidendi

The central issue is whether the Labour Court has jurisdiction to entertain a dispute concerning the interpretation and application of a collective agreement. The Court finds that such disputes, in terms of section 24 of the Labour Relations Act, fall within the jurisdiction of the CCMA or a bargaining council, unless the agreement provides otherwise. The agreement in question contains a dispute resolution clause requiring referral to private arbitration. The applicants were dismissed after the agreement was concluded, but the agreement's duration extended beyond their dismissal and the facts giving rise to their dismissal were related to those addressed by the agreement. However, the...

Court Disposition

Applicants' statement of case dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The applicants' statement of case is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.