Moloi and Others v Road Traffic Management Corporation (JS966/18) [2020] ZALCJHB 207 (18 August 2020)
- Citation
- [2020] ZALCJHB 207
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Panel
- F Coetzee
- Case number
- JS966/18
More details
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Panel
- F Coetzee
- Case number
- JS966/18
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that the applicants failed to establish an employment relationship with the Road Traffic Management Corporation. The evidence showed that the contracts of employment were between the applicants and the Department of Community Safety, Gauteng Provincial Government, not the respondent. In the absence of such a relationship, the application for default judgment could not succeed.
Court disposition
Application for default judgment dismissed.
Orders
- The application for default judgment is dismissed with no order as to costs.
02
Material facts
Parties
Tebogo Moloi & Others
ApplicantRoad Traffic Management Corporation
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Default Judgment Application / Application for Default Judgment
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the applicants were employed by the Road Traffic Management Corporation.
- 02
Whether the applicants are entitled to default judgment against the respondent.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicants alleged that they were employed under contracts managed initially by the Department of Community Safety, Gauteng Provincial Government, and that management was later transferred to the Road Traffic Management Corporation. They relied on attached employment contracts to support their claim for relief.
- Respondent
- The respondent did not appear, and the case proceeded as a default judgment application. However, the court found no clear evidence of an employment relationship between the applicants and the Road Traffic Management Corporation.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Labour Relations Act, 66 of 1995
A default judgment may only be granted where the applicant establishes a valid employment relationship with the respondent.
- 02
National Union of Mineworkers v East Rand Gold & Uranium Co Ltd 1991 (2) SA 608 (A)
The existence of a contract of employment is essential for relief in labour disputes.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that the applicants failed to establish an employment relationship with the Road Traffic Management Corporation. The evidence showed that the contracts of employment were between the applicants and the Department of Community Safety, Gauteng Provincial Government, not the respondent. In the absence of such a relationship, the application for default judgment could not succeed.
Obiter and limits
- The management of the college was transferred from the Department to the RTMC, but this did not alter the contractual employment relationship.
Court disposition
Application for default judgment dismissed.
- The application for default judgment is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Source and reliance status
Labour Court Johannesburg
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Labour Court Johannesburg
Judgment
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
Not Reportable
Case no: JS966/18
In the matter between:
TEBOGO MOLOI & OTHERS First Applicant
and
ROAD
TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT CORPORATION Respondent
Heard: 18 August 2020
Delivered: This judgment was handed down electronically by circulation to the parties’ representatives by email and release to SAFLII. The date for hand-down is deemed to be 18 August 2020.
JUDGMENT
COETZEE, AJ
[1] The applicant's approach scored for default judgement.
[2] I only pursue a case against the Road Traffic Management Operation. The case against the Department of Community Safety and its MEC has been withdrawn.
[3] In short, they were attending college training when they were called away and the training stopped.
[4] The relief that they ask depends upon who their employer was.
[5] I make the allegation that the college was managed by the Department where after the management thereof was transferred to the RTMC.
[6] In their statement of case I rely upon contracts of employment. An example of those contracts is attached to the papers. There can be no doubt that the employment contract was between the government of the Republic of South Africa represented by the Department of Community Safety, Gauteng Provincial Government and the applicants.
[7] There is no clear evidence that the applicants were employed by RTMC.
[8] The application for default judgement is dismissed in the absence of an employment relationship between the applicants and the RTMC.
Order
[9] I make the following order:
1. The application for default judgment is dismissed with no order as to costs.
__
F. Coetzee
Acting Judge of the Labour Court of South Africa
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.