Mokgata and Others v Food and Allied Workers Union (21679/04) [2007] ZAGPHC 340; (2007) 28 ILJ 2696 (T) (8 June 2007)

Mokgata and Others v Food and Allied Workers Union (21679/04) [2007] ZAGPHC 340; (2007) 28 ILJ 2696 (T) (8 June 2007)

The court found that the clauses relied upon by the plaintiffs were not contractual but rather mission statements, and did not impose a binding obligation on the union to provide legal assistance in every circumstance. The evidence did not establish that the union repudiated its mandate or refused to assist the plaintiffs; rather, the plaintiffs themselves chose to instruct private attorneys. Delays in the matter were not solely attributable to the union, and the failure to file a pre-trial minute did not amount to repudiation. The plaintiffs failed to prove liability on the part of the defendant for the legal fees incurred. Accordingly, absolution from the instance was granted with costs.

Citation
[2007] ZAGPHC 340
Parties
Plaintiff: James Mokgata & 58 Others; Defendant: Food & Allied Workers Union
Court
High Courts - Gauteng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 June 2007
Case Number
21679/04
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Liability Phase Separated From Quantum; Trial on Liability Only
Outcome
Absolution from the instance granted with costs against the plaintiffs.
Judges
Motata
Legal Topics
Trade Union Liability, Legal Assistance Obligation, Union Constitution Interpretation, Absolution From Instance
Civil Procedure Labour Law Trade Union Liability Legal Assistance Obligation Union Constitution Interpretation Absolution From Instance

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Mokgata & 58 Others

Plaintiff

Food & Allied Workers Union

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Liability Phase Separated From Quantum; Trial on Liability Only

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant union was contractually obliged to provide legal assistance to the plaintiffs in their dispute with their employer.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant repudiated its mandate to assist the plaintiffs, thereby incurring liability for their legal fees.
  3. 3 Whether the relevant clauses of the union constitution created enforceable contractual obligations.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the clauses relied upon by the plaintiffs were not contractual but rather mission statements, and did not impose a binding obligation on the union to provide legal assistance in every circumstance. The evidence did not establish that the union repudiated its mandate or refused to assist the plaintiffs; rather, the plaintiffs themselves chose to instruct private attorneys. Delays in the matter were not solely attributable to the union, and the failure to file a pre-trial minute did not amount to repudiation. The plaintiffs failed to prove liability on the part of the defendant for the legal fees incurred. Accordingly, absolution from the instance was granted with costs.

Court Disposition

Absolution from the instance granted with costs against the plaintiffs.

Orders

  • Absolution from the instance is granted.
  • Plaintiffs are ordered to pay the costs of the action.