Molaetsa v Meyer and Another (J2421/06) [2007] ZALCJHB 72 (6 July 2007)

Molaetsa v Meyer and Another (J2421/06) [2007] ZALCJHB 72 (6 July 2007)

The court held that while the arbitration award had been certified and was enforceable as if it were an order of the Labour Court, the applicant's claim for remuneration following his alleged tender of services was not competent in these proceedings. The proper procedure for enforcing reinstatement and remuneration, where there is alleged non-compliance, is to institute contempt proceedings under section 143(4) of the Labour Relations Act. The application to make the award an order of court was granted with the consent of the second respondent, but the claim for remuneration was rejected. The applicant was ordered to pay costs due to his persistence with an unfounded claim despite...

Citation
[2007] ZALCJHB 72
Parties
Applicant: Mr Joseph Molaetsa; Respondent: Mr A I Meyer; Respondent: Old Mutual Life Assurance
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 July 2007
Case Number
J2421/06
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application to Make Arbitration Award an Order of Court; Request for Reasons for Order
Outcome
The arbitration award was made an order of court; the applicant's claim for remuneration was dismissed; costs were awarded against the applicant.
Judges
A Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Arbitration Award Enforcement, Section 158 1 C Application, Contempt of Court, Reinstatement, Remuneration Claim
Labour Law Civil Procedure Arbitration Award Enforcement Section 158 1 C Application Contempt of Court Reinstatement Remuneration Claim

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

Mr Joseph Molaetsa

Applicant

Mr A I Meyer

Respondent

Old Mutual Life Assurance

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application to Make Arbitration Award an Order of Court; Request for Reasons for Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award should be made an order of court under section 158(1)(c) of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to remuneration from the date of his tender of services until acceptance by the second respondent.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant should have instituted contempt proceedings instead of seeking remuneration in this application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that while the arbitration award had been certified and was enforceable as if it were an order of the Labour Court, the applicant's claim for remuneration following his alleged tender of services was not competent in these proceedings. The proper procedure for enforcing reinstatement and remuneration, where there is alleged non-compliance, is to institute contempt proceedings under section 143(4) of the Labour Relations Act. The application to make the award an order of court was granted with the consent of the second respondent, but the claim for remuneration was rejected. The applicant was ordered to pay costs due to his persistence with an unfounded claim despite...

Court Disposition

The arbitration award was made an order of court; the applicant's claim for remuneration was dismissed; costs were awarded against the applicant.

Orders

  • The Arbitration Award dated 19 April 2006 and issued by Commissioner Boniswa Mbovane under case number GAJB 27625-05 is made an order of Court in terms of Section 158(1)(c) of the Labour Relations Act No. 66 of 1995.
  • The applicant is to pay the costs of this application.