National Commissioner of SAPS v Myers (CA 05/2014) [2015] ZALAC 106 (10 April 2015)

National Commissioner of SAPS v Myers (CA 05/2014) [2015] ZALAC 106 (10 April 2015)

The Labour Appeal Court held that the appellants were obliged to comply with the Supreme Court of Appeal's clear and unequivocal order to reinstate the respondent to his former position. The restructuring and abolition of the original post did not absolve the appellants of this duty, as they failed to raise any objection to reinstatement at the appropriate time before the Supreme Court of Appeal. The existence of a similar post after restructuring meant that reinstatement was possible, and the appellants' attempt to offer an alternative position did not constitute compliance. The appeal was therefore dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2015] ZALAC 106
Parties
Appellant: National Commissioner of the South African Police; Appellant: Provincial Commissioner of the South African Police: Western Cape; Respondent: Ivan Myers
Court
Labour Appeal Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 April 2015
Case Number
CA 05/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Davis, Ndlovu, Sutherland
Legal Topics
Reinstatement, Unfair Dismissal, Compliance With Court Order, Remedies for Unfair Dismissal
Labour Law Reinstatement Unfair Dismissal Compliance With Court Order Remedies for Unfair Dismissal

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

National Commissioner of the South African Police

Appellant

Provincial Commissioner of the South African Police: Western Cape

Appellant

Ivan Myers

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants complied with the Supreme Court of Appeal's order to reinstate the respondent to his former position.
  2. 2 Whether restructuring and abolition of the original post excused the appellants from reinstating the respondent.
  3. 3 Whether the appellants were in contempt of court for failing to reinstate the respondent as ordered.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Appeal Court held that the appellants were obliged to comply with the Supreme Court of Appeal's clear and unequivocal order to reinstate the respondent to his former position. The restructuring and abolition of the original post did not absolve the appellants of this duty, as they failed to raise any objection to reinstatement at the appropriate time before the Supreme Court of Appeal. The existence of a similar post after restructuring meant that reinstatement was possible, and the appellants' attempt to offer an alternative position did not constitute compliance. The appeal was therefore dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.
  • The appellants are ordered to reinstate the respondent to the position of Commander of the Cape Town Dog Unit at Maitland with retrospective effect to the date of dismissal.