Mokone v Broadcasting Electronic Media and Allied Workers Union (J671/2000) [2001] ZALC 24 (13 February 2001)

Mokone v Broadcasting Electronic Media and Allied Workers Union (J671/2000) [2001] ZALC 24 (13 February 2001)

The court found that the retrenchment was procedurally fair, accepting the respondent's evidence that consultations took place and that the applicant was informed of the contemplated retrenchment and offered alternatives. Documentary evidence, such as correspondence and time sheets, supported the respondent's version. The court also found the retrenchment substantively fair, concluding that the operational requirements were genuine and not a pretext to replace the applicant with du Buisson. The applicant's claim for leave pay was upheld, as it was undisputed that he had accumulated leave for certain periods. The court declined to award costs to the respondent, considering the applicant's...

Citation
[2001] ZALC 24
Parties
Applicant: Christopher Mokone; Respondent: Broadcasting Electronic Media and Allied Workers Union
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 February 2001
Case Number
J671/2000
Procedural Posture
Labour Dismissal Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application for reinstatement and/or compensation dismissed; respondent ordered to pay applicant for thirty-six days accumulated leave; each party to pay its own costs.
Judges
T J Bruinders
Legal Topics
Retrenchment, Procedural Fairness, Substantive Fairness, Leave Pay, Costs Award
Labour Law Retrenchment Procedural Fairness Substantive Fairness Leave Pay Costs Award

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher Mokone

Applicant

Broadcasting Electronic Media and Allied Workers Union

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Dismissal Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's retrenchment was procedurally fair under section 189 of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the retrenchment was substantively fair and based on genuine operational requirements.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to leave pay for the relevant periods.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the retrenchment was procedurally fair, accepting the respondent's evidence that consultations took place and that the applicant was informed of the contemplated retrenchment and offered alternatives. Documentary evidence, such as correspondence and time sheets, supported the respondent's version. The court also found the retrenchment substantively fair, concluding that the operational requirements were genuine and not a pretext to replace the applicant with du Buisson. The applicant's claim for leave pay was upheld, as it was undisputed that he had accumulated leave for certain periods. The court declined to award costs to the respondent, considering the applicant's...

Court Disposition

Application for reinstatement and/or compensation dismissed; respondent ordered to pay applicant for thirty-six days accumulated leave; each party to pay its own costs.

Orders

  • The application for reinstatement and/or compensation is dismissed.
  • The respondent is ordered to pay the applicant the equivalent of thirty-six days leave, calculated at his rate of pay at the date of retrenchment.