Molala v Metsimaholo Local Municipality and Others (5464/2018) [2019] ZAFSHC 267 (20 August 2019)

Molala v Metsimaholo Local Municipality and Others (5464/2018) [2019] ZAFSHC 267 (20 August 2019)

The court found that all charges against the applicant related to financial misconduct and arose after the commencement of the 2014 Regulations. The 2014 Regulations prescribe the procedure for investigating and adjudicating financial misconduct, and Regulation 20 clarifies that any allegations or investigations commenced after 30 May 2014 must be dealt with under the 2014 Regulations. The court rejected the respondent's arguments regarding jurisdiction, finding that the application concerned the lawfulness of the procedure, not the enforcement of rights under the Labour Relations Act. The defences of lis alibi pendens and res judicata were dismissed due to lack of evidence and because...

Citation
[2019] ZAFSHC 267
Parties
Applicant: Stephen Mzilozi Molala; Respondent: Metsimaholo Local Municipality; Respondent: Lindiwe Tshongwe N.O.; Respondent: Thabo Mabasa N.O.; Respondent: Matome Mashao N.O.
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 August 2019
Case Number
5464/2018
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Judgment on Application for Interdict
Outcome
Application granted; interdict and declaratory relief issued in favour of the applicant.
Judges
PE Molitsoane
Legal Topics
Municipal Regulations, Disciplinary Procedure, Financial Misconduct, Interdict, Jurisdiction, Transitional Arrangements
Administrative Law Labour Law Municipal Regulations Disciplinary Procedure Financial Misconduct Interdict Jurisdiction Transitional Arrangements

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Mzilozi Molala

Applicant

Metsimaholo Local Municipality

Respondent

Lindiwe Tshongwe N.O.

Respondent

Thabo Mabasa N.O.

Respondent

Matome Mashao N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Final Judgment on Application for Interdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the disciplinary proceedings against the applicant should be conducted under the 2014 Regulations rather than the 2010 Regulations.
  2. 2 Whether non-compliance with the 2014 Regulations renders the disciplinary proceedings unlawful.
  3. 3 Whether the court has jurisdiction to grant interdictory relief in this matter.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that all charges against the applicant related to financial misconduct and arose after the commencement of the 2014 Regulations. The 2014 Regulations prescribe the procedure for investigating and adjudicating financial misconduct, and Regulation 20 clarifies that any allegations or investigations commenced after 30 May 2014 must be dealt with under the 2014 Regulations. The court rejected the respondent's arguments regarding jurisdiction, finding that the application concerned the lawfulness of the procedure, not the enforcement of rights under the Labour Relations Act. The defences of lis alibi pendens and res judicata were dismissed due to lack of evidence and because...

Court Disposition

Application granted; interdict and declaratory relief issued in favour of the applicant.

Orders

  • The First Respondent is interdicted and restrained from continuing with the disciplinary proceedings pending and instituted against the Applicant until the First Respondent complies with the Local Government: Municipal Regulations on Financial Misconduct Procedure and Criminal Proceedings.
  • It is declared that the appointment of the Fourth Respondent as Presiding Officer of the disciplinary hearing is invalid, unlawful and null and void.